Jeff Sebo, The New York Times; Should Chimpanzees Be Considered ‘Persons’?
"The idea of nonhuman personhood does raise difficult questions. One question is which rights nonhumans can have. For instance, if Kiko and Tommy can have the right to liberty, can they also have the right to property? What about the right to free expression or association, or the right to political representation or participation?
Another question is which nonhumans can have rights. For instance, if Kiko and Tommy can have rights, can bonobos and gorillas have rights too? What about cats, dogs and fish? What about chickens, cows and pigs? What about ants or sophisticated artificial intelligence programs?
These questions are unsettling. They are also reasonable to ask. After all, we might think that we need to draw the line somewhere. So if we decide not to draw the line at species membership — if we decide to accept that at least some nonhumans can have at least some rights — then it is not immediately clear where to draw it instead, or even, on reflection, whether to draw this particular kind of line at all."
Issues and developments related to ethics, information, and technologies, examined in the ethics and intellectual property graduate courses I teach at the University of Pittsburgh School of Computing and Information. My Bloomsbury book "Ethics, Information, and Technology" will be published in Summer 2025. Kip Currier, PhD, JD
Showing posts with label animal rights theory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label animal rights theory. Show all posts
Monday, April 9, 2018
Should Chimpanzees Be Considered ‘Persons’?; The New York Times, April 7, 2018
Tuesday, June 13, 2017
Chimpanzees are not ‘persons,’ appeals court says; Washington Post, June 10, 2017
Karin Brulliard, Washington Post; Chimpanzees are not ‘persons,’ appeals court says
"Chimpanzees are not legal persons who have a right to be free, a New York state appeals said in a ruling Thursday that denied a request to move two captive apes to a sanctuary.
The unanimous decision was another setback for the Nonhuman Rights Project, a group that for several years has sought to persuade New York courts to grant writs of habeas corpus to chimpanzees. A court that agreed would be allowing the animals to challenge the legality of their “detention” — like human prisoners can do — and would also be acknowledging that the apes are not things but rather are legal persons entitled to bodily liberty...
The Nonhuman Rights Project said in a statement that it was reviewing the decision, but it made clear that it would continue in its quest.
“For 2,000 years, all nonhuman animals have been legal things who lack the capacity for any legal rights. This is not going to change without a struggle,” Wise said. “Public opinion has begun to tilt in our favor since we started filing these lawsuits, likely as a result of them.”"
"Chimpanzees are not legal persons who have a right to be free, a New York state appeals said in a ruling Thursday that denied a request to move two captive apes to a sanctuary.
The unanimous decision was another setback for the Nonhuman Rights Project, a group that for several years has sought to persuade New York courts to grant writs of habeas corpus to chimpanzees. A court that agreed would be allowing the animals to challenge the legality of their “detention” — like human prisoners can do — and would also be acknowledging that the apes are not things but rather are legal persons entitled to bodily liberty...
The Nonhuman Rights Project said in a statement that it was reviewing the decision, but it made clear that it would continue in its quest.
“For 2,000 years, all nonhuman animals have been legal things who lack the capacity for any legal rights. This is not going to change without a struggle,” Wise said. “Public opinion has begun to tilt in our favor since we started filing these lawsuits, likely as a result of them.”"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)