• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Handbasket, hell, going, to, in, a, world

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Handbasket, hell, going, to, in, a, world

    not made up, honestly
    Discuss, wet your pants, abuse chicken, whatever
    http://europeancourier.org/Rights_for_Apes.htm



    In April, 2006, the ruling socialist coalition in Spain proposed a bill, which would give great apes (chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and bonobos) the basic, fundamental rights, which are enjoyed by human beings under international human rights law. This legislative action started a wide public discussion and attracted criticism from numerous right wing politicians.



    The proposed bill would eliminate the concept of “ownership” and the great apes could not be regarded a property anymore. Instead of that the said animals would be placed under “guardianship”, similar to that established in cases of infants, handicapped and elderly people. Furthermore, great apes from Spanish zoos would be removed to state-built and publicly funded sanctuaries, where they would create a specific community. Moreover, their lives and the basic right to live would be protected in the same way as it is foreseen by human rights law in respect to people. Murdering or mistreating a great ape would constitute a criminal offence, with the exceptions of medical euthanasia and acting in self-defense.



    The Spanish proposal of the Great Apes Law is a serious project suggested by serious politicians. However analyzed from different view, it is a product of the ongoing conflict between European leftist ideologies and right wing political theories. The European leftist ideology is strongly influenced by Hegel’s philosophy that God is reflected and appears in things and beings that possess self-awareness. For that reason, the self-awareness is the most important rationale for granting protection under existing laws to such kind of beings. In leftists’ opinion, the said species possess enough self-consciousness to justify granting them various fundamental rights previously reserved only for human beings. According to Darwin’s theory, the great apes have the same biological ancestors as humankind and share more than 95% of DNA with people. Guided by this ideology, the leftist movements as well support the right to abort pregnancy and the right to medical euthanasia, believing that human embryos do not possess any kind of self-awareness and the self-consciousness of elderly people is significantly diminished. The great apes in comparison to human embryos and elderly people possess much greater self-awareness, which fact justifies granting them legal protection.



    As a matter of fact, the leftist ideology created a considerable competition for Christian theology and political theory. In leftist thought, God is ever changing, exists in self-conscious beings and evolves in different forms. Therefore, the proposed legislation has been openly criticized by the Roman Catholic Church, which ironically observed that Spain does not give rights to unborn children, human embryos but is going to grant fundamental human rights to apes. The concern was also express by Amnesty International, which stated that law-makers should rather focus in the first place on securing and guaranteeing rights for human beings than for animals. The proposal was as well criticized by right wing politicians, who called it “an act of moral poverty” – a statement which confirmed that political differences in this issue have strong ideological background.



    Nevertheless, the Spanish proposal of the Great Apes Law has been strongly supported by various international organizations, scientists and lawyers. The most influential in this field has been a Seattle-based organization called the Great Ape Project. The aim of this organization is to lobby for granting chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans, the basic, fundamental rights, which would enable these animals to live out their lives independently and under protection of law. The Great Ape Project has been advocating for disallowing arbitrary depravation of apes’ liberty and consequently granting them the right to due trial in a court of law. Additionally the organization has been lobbying for banning torture and infliction of pain on great apes. The ultimate aim of the group is to influence the United Nations to adopt a declaration on giving the great apes some of the human rights.



    The Spanish legislation proposal is not the first one of such kind in the history. In 1999, New Zealand passed a law prohibiting the use of great apes in any experiments that would benefit the human kind. Medical experiments on apes are allowed only if such tests are relevant to apes’ wellbeing. The apes in New Zealand were also secured the right to live. Medical experimentation on great apes has been also banned in Great Britain.



    Nonetheless the Spanish project goes a little bit further than New Zealand’s solution, while being deeply influenced by moral leftist ideology. For that reason the public debate will continue and attract fierce criticism from right wing politicians and the Roman Catholic Church. The idea of granting human rights to animals seems to be evolving and becoming a serious issue of European political science.
    Why not?

    #2
    congratulations to all the monkeys on this forum !
    So when are the daleks getting human rights ?

    Comment


      #3
      Gotta be done otherwise Conquest of the Planet of the Apes will become a reality.

      Comment


        #4
        I foresee a future where monkeys will rule the world.
        oops they are already ruling the world

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by zeitghost
          What about human rights for Giant Alien Lizards?

          It's just coz we're green isn't it, isn't it?

          Greenist barstewards.
          Here today.....Gorn tomorrow....!
          http://nickmueller.blogspot.com/

          Comment


            #6
            Speaking of human rights, I watched a documentary called "The Corporation" at the weekend about the history of corporations. I suppose it was an American left-wing perspective on things, but the approach was quite amusing.

            Apparently legislation was passed after the civil war to give human rights to former slaves, but lawyers immediately argued that the same legislation should apply to corporations. This was upheld, and corporations became legal "persons" with many new rights, e.g. the right to own property, to sue in court etc.

            Documentary then went through a medical checklist to ascertain what sort of "person" a typical corporation is. They ticked off things like inability to feel guilt, lack of concern for external consequences of their actions, etc. etc. Conclusion was that corporations as "people" fulfil all the criteria for being diagnosed as pyschopaths.

            OK it was a long-winded way of reaching an obvious conclusion, but I enjoyed it.

            Comment


              #7
              Ooh err

              Originally posted by IR35 Avoider
              Speaking of human rights, I watched a documentary called "The Corporation" at the weekend about the history of corporations. I suppose it was an American left-wing perspective on things, but the approach was quite amusing.

              Apparently legislation was passed after the civil war to give human rights to former slaves, but lawyers immediately argued that the same legislation should apply to corporations. This was upheld, and corporations became legal "persons" with many new rights, e.g. the right to own property, to sue in court etc.

              Documentary then went through a medical checklist to ascertain what sort of "person" a typical corporation is. They ticked off things like inability to feel guilt, lack of concern for external consequences of their actions, etc. etc. Conclusion was that corporations as "people" fulfil all the criteria for being diagnosed as pyschopaths.

              OK it was a long-winded way of reaching an obvious conclusion, but I enjoyed it.
              Problem is that even pyschopaths are entitled to human rights.
              Why not?

              Comment


                #8
                Hmmm...so if a company in the US, Texas for example, commits a corporate crime, how is the requisite penalty going to be carried out? By gasing everyone through the air-vents?

                Comment

                Working...
                X