Sanity in the Court: Judge Denies Claim That Chimps are Persons

Aletelia ^ | August 1, 2015 | JOHN BURGER

[NYer]

Though a New York judge ruled Thursday that the law still considers chimpanzees property, not people, a prominent thinker in the pro-life movement warned that attempts to raise animals to human status will continue. 

Wesley J. Smith, co-director of the Discovery Institute's Center on Human Exceptionalism, said Friday, "We are gratified that a court refused to declare two chimpanzees 'persons.' That is right and proper. Chimps are animals, and the 'species barrier' separating the value of humans and animals, as some animal rights advocates put it, must never be breached."
 
"But make no mistake," Smith said. "Attempts to elevate animals—and even nature—to human-level value have only just begun."

An organization calling itself the Nonhuman Rights Project filed lawsuits in December of 2013 claiming that four New York chimpanzees—Hercules and Leo at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, and two others on private property—were too cognitively and emotionally complex to be held in captivity and should be relocated to an established chimpanzee sanctuary, Science magazine reported.

NhRP petitioned three lower court judges with a writ of habeas corpus, which is traditionally used to prevent people from being unlawfully imprisoned. By granting the writ, the judges would have implicitly acknowledged that chimpanzees were legal people too—a first step in freeing them.

 

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Barbara Jaffe, considering the claim against Stony Brook, acknowledged the similarities between chimpanzees and humans, but felt she was bound by precedent to deny the claim.

The ruling came just weeks after Steven Wise, a lawyer for the NhRP, argued the case in court, comparing Hercules and Leo’s confinement to slavery, the involuntary detention of people with mental illnesses and imprisonment.

But an assistant attorney general, representing the state university system, argued that chimpanzees are not entitled to legal personhood rights because they could not fulfill the responsibilities of people in society.

Wise presented “hundreds of pages of expert opinions from academics, zoologists, biologists and others he said supported the claim that cognitively, chimpanzees—along with dolphins, bonobos, orangutans and elephants—are advanced species,” the Associated Press reported.

Justice Jaffe didn’t shut the door on a future ruling. "Efforts to extend legal rights to chimpanzees are...understandable; some day they may even succeed," she wrote in a 33-page decision. "For now, however, given the precedent to which I am bound, it is hereby ordered, that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied and the proceeding is dismissed."

In a statement, the NhRP said it would appeal the ruling but pointed out that Jaffe said in her ruling that "the parameters of legal personhood have been and will continue to be discussed and debated by legal theorists, commentators, and courts and will not be focused on semantics or biology, even philosophy, but on the proper allocation of rights under the law, asking, in effect, who counts under our law.”
 
The ruling is only a minor setback, according to the Discovery Institute's Smith, who said that "animal personalizers" are on a roll.

"An Argentinean judge has declared an orangutan to be a 'person,' and granted a writ of habeas corpus in the animal's name, forcing the ape to be removed from a zoo. New Zealand has declared a river to be a person with 'rights,'" he said.

"This threat to the unique dignity and sanctity of human life must be taken seriously and combatted with the greatest vigor in our parliaments, legislatures, courts, and organs of public opinion," Smith warned. "If we elevate animals and nature to the status of humans, we are really reducing us to the status of animals. If that is how we define ourselves, that is precisely how we will act."

Smith finds it ironic that attempts to personalize animals and nature comes at a time when "concerted efforts are under way in bioethics and law to depersonalize some people, the unborn, people with profound disabilities, etc. These so-called human non-persons are seen as natural resources, to be harvested and experimented on—as we have seen in the USA with Planned Parenthood."


John Burger is news editor for Aleteia's English edition.
 

Though a New York judge ruled Thursday that the law still considers chimpanzees property, not people, a prominent thinker in the pro-life movement warned that attempts to raise animals to human status will continue. 

Wesley J. Smith, co-director of the Discovery Institute's Center on Human Exceptionalism, said Friday, "We are gratified that a court refused to declare two chimpanzees 'persons.' That is right and proper. Chimps are animals, and the 'species barrier' separating the value of humans and animals, as some animal rights advocates put it, must never be breached."
 
"But make no mistake," Smith said. "Attempts to elevate animals—and even nature—to human-level value have only just begun."

An organization calling itself the Nonhuman Rights Project filed lawsuits in December of 2013 claiming that four New York chimpanzees—Hercules and Leo at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, and two others on private property—were too cognitively and emotionally complex to be held in captivity and should be relocated to an established chimpanzee sanctuary, Science magazine reported.

NhRP petitioned three lower court judges with a writ of habeas corpus, which is traditionally used to prevent people from being unlawfully imprisoned. By granting the writ, the judges would have implicitly acknowledged that chimpanzees were legal people too—a first step in freeing them.

 

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Barbara Jaffe, considering the claim against Stony Brook, acknowledged the similarities between chimpanzees and humans, but felt she was bound by precedent to deny the claim.

The ruling came just weeks after Steven Wise, a lawyer for the NhRP, argued the case in court, comparing Hercules and Leo’s confinement to slavery, the involuntary detention of people with mental illnesses and imprisonment.

But an assistant attorney general, representing the state university system, argued that chimpanzees are not entitled to legal personhood rights because they could not fulfill the responsibilities of people in society.

Wise presented “hundreds of pages of expert opinions from academics, zoologists, biologists and others he said supported the claim that cognitively, chimpanzees—along with dolphins, bonobos, orangutans and elephants—are advanced species,” the Associated Press reported.

Justice Jaffe didn’t shut the door on a future ruling. "Efforts to extend legal rights to chimpanzees are...understandable; some day they may even succeed," she wrote in a 33-page decision. "For now, however, given the precedent to which I am bound, it is hereby ordered, that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied and the proceeding is dismissed."

In a statement, the NhRP said it would appeal the ruling but pointed out that Jaffe said in her ruling that "the parameters of legal personhood have been and will continue to be discussed and debated by legal theorists, commentators, and courts and will not be focused on semantics or biology, even philosophy, but on the proper allocation of rights under the law, asking, in effect, who counts under our law.”
 
The ruling is only a minor setback, according to the Discovery Institute's Smith, who said that "animal personalizers" are on a roll.

"An Argentinean judge has declared an orangutan to be a 'person,' and granted a writ of habeas corpus in the animal's name, forcing the ape to be removed from a zoo. New Zealand has declared a river to be a person with 'rights,'" he said.

"This threat to the unique dignity and sanctity of human life must be taken seriously and combatted with the greatest vigor in our parliaments, legislatures, courts, and organs of public opinion," Smith warned. "If we elevate animals and nature to the status of humans, we are really reducing us to the status of animals. If that is how we define ourselves, that is precisely how we will act."

Smith finds it ironic that attempts to personalize animals and nature comes at a time when "concerted efforts are under way in bioethics and law to depersonalize some people, the unborn, people with profound disabilities, etc. These so-called human non-persons are seen as natural resources, to be harvested and experimented on—as we have seen in the USA with Planned Parenthood."

[Blennos]

At the current rapid rate of societal decay, how long before chimps are voting — democratic of course.

[trisham]

No. Not unless you want to be shunned at best, and run down by a mob in the street at worst.

[Grateful2God]

It would have to be a banana wedding cake... And is the person refused to bake it, Clarence Darrow to prosecute any dissenters, and maybe Marlin Perkins for the best man!

Ironically, the screenplay for "Planet of the Apes" was written, at least in part, by Rod Serling. I'm beginning to think the guy was a prophet...

[GoneSalt]

So...a rat is a cat is a baby is a lion but NOT a chimp??

Racists.

[TBP]

Now, wait a minute — has he looked at the candidates for president?

[Grateful2God]

Nothing at all. It’s when animals are nurtured and cared for while humans are starving, slaughtered, and aborted that we see how our society’s priorities are skewed.

[GeronL]

bump

[Rodamala]

How frightening is it that JUDGES are making these calls??? Terrifying, actually.

[Politicalkiddo]

Is “Chimp” the code word for disgruntled male teens or for Islamists?

[Mark]

#Monkey Lives Matter!

[trisham]

Neither one, to my knowledge.

[Talisker]

Before the Court, “person” means incorporation.

That’s what the judges ruled on.

[Rodamala]

[Grateful2God]

Lol! Still like that movie! And loved Charlton Heston!

[ETL]

Women flock to Japan zoo to see 'hunky' gorilla
AFP, via YahooNews ^ | June 25, 2015 | Associated Foreign Press

A giant gorilla with brooding good looks and rippling muscles is causing a stir at a Japanese zoo, with women flocking to check out the hunky pin-up.

Shabani, an 18-year-old silverback who tips the scales at around 180 kilograms (400 pounds), has become the star attraction at Higashiyama Zoo and Botanical Gardens in Nagoya, striking smouldering poses the movie model in "Zoolander" would be proud of.

"He often rests his chin on his hands and looks intently at you," zoo spokesman Takayuki Ishikawa told AFP on Friday.

"He is more buff than most gorillas and he's at his peak physically. We've seen a rise in the number of female visitors -- women say he's very good-looking."

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
________________________________________

[Politicalkiddo]

I was kidding. :P

[ETL]

Japanese women go ape over surprisingly handsome gorilla
By Wilfred Chan and Yoko Wakatsuki, CNN
June 26, 2015

A surprisingly hunky male gorilla, Shabani, has female humans going ape after mugshots of the 18-year-old animal began going viral on Twitter.

Zoo officials tell CNN that young women have been flocking to see the pretty primate, who lives at the Higashiyama Zoo and Botanical Gardens in Nagoya.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/26/asia/handsome-gorilla-shabani/index.html

[ETL]

[trisham]

My apologies, FRiend. :)

[Grateful2God]

" If only the chimp could talk it would say it was a human female and deserved recognition. I’m sure that all liberals would agree. "

A hat and glasses and she could pass for Bela Abzug: