Animal Rights

Campus Report ^ | April 24, 2008 | Deborah Lambert

[bs9021]

Animal Rights

by: Deborah Lambert, April 24, 2008

It used to be so easy owning a pet. You were the boss, Fido was the dog. Today, if you get home late from work, he might sue you.

Thanks to a new legal specialty called Animal Protection Litigation, there is a rapidly growing niche for those concerned with the rights of animal companions. Some say it’s growing because animals are no longer just “property,” but have true legal standing as “partial beneficiaries of estates, subjects of lawsuits and victims of abuse,” according to the Raleigh News and Observer.

Proponents of the movement say that they need representation since they can't speak for themselves.

Yes of course. There are reasons for concern when animals are abused, but that being said, the zealots have gained control of the movement to the point where a custody battle involving owners of a 36-year-old chimp named Moe prompted people to say that animals should have lawyers and should be able to sue.

Schools are adding courses like the Experiential Animal Law Class at Georgetown University....

[Knitebane]

Animal Rights:

You have the right to be tasty. If you waive the right to be tasty you can and will be salted and buttered.

You have the right to breading. If you cannot afford a breading one will be applied to you.

Mr. Chicken, do you understand these rights as I have explained them to you?

[Slapshot68]

You know what’s next right? The right of people to marry their pets.

[Mount Athos]

I wonder when babies in the womb will get a tiny fraction of the legal protections given to pets or farm animals.

[JRandomFreeper]

My pets may as well be married to me. They lay around all day, don't clean house, make me feed them, clean up after them, sleep on the bed, and we don't have sex. Sounds a lot like one of my marriages. ;)

/johnny/

[Cicero]

Wouldn’t you know that Georgetown would be the first. Those whacky Jesuits!

[Cyber Liberty]

Proponents of the movement say that they need representation since they can't speak for themselves.

Ah, innocent victims of choice for Liberals...ones who "can't speak for themselves" and tell them to butt out. Unborn babies can't protest being killed and sucked out of the womb, so why not defend them as well? They "can't speak for themselves."

[rellimpank]

-—more of the “inmates in charge of the asylum” syndrome-—

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

Thank you liberals. Once again you showed the world that my user name is well chosen. I didn’t have to do anything.

[stuartcr]

I imagine Michael Vick’s dogs would have liked a good lawyer.

[Rick.Donaldson]

Animals are animals. They are property. Period.

If they are edible (and most of them are) then.. they are food.

Animals don’t have rights.

[Don Corleone]

I guess that they have “More rights” than the kids in Texas.

[deuteronlmy232]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DD0aAdhMGTU