Pushing Elephant “Personhood”

first_imgA Circular Argument Cross-posted at The Corner and at the Humanize blog, published by Discovery Institute’s Bradley Center. Photo credit: Geran de Klerk via Unsplash.Animal rights must always be distinguished from animal welfare. The former is an ideology that creates moral equality between us and fauna. In this view, human beings have no more right to own animals than we do people. The Nonhuman Rights Project is leading this charge. Currently, it is seeking a writ of habeas corpus to release an elephant kept at the Bronx Zoo. The argument isn’t based on the pachyderm’s welfare but rather its supposed “personhood.” The Greatest Threat Recommended Appellate Justice Peter Moulton told Wise his argument “doesn’t answer the question of why a paradigm that was created for one species could possibly apply to another one.” Moulton noted the word “person” appears in the statute for a habeas corpus writ, a legal demand for a prisoner to be produced so a court can determine if imprisonment is lawful.[Stephen] Wise said the issue is not whether Happy is a person but if she has the right to liberty protected by habeas corpus. If so, he said, she is automatically a person, legally speaking. Jane Goodall Meets the God Hypothesis Wesley J. SmithChair and Senior Fellow, Center on Human ExceptionalismWesley J. Smith is Chair and Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism. Wesley is a contributor to National Review and is the author of 14 books, in recent years focusing on human dignity, liberty, and equality. Wesley has been recognized as one of America’s premier public intellectuals on bioethics by National Journal and has been honored by the Human Life Foundation as a “Great Defender of Life” for his work against suicide and euthanasia. Wesley’s most recent book is Culture of Death: The Age of “Do Harm” Medicine, a warning about the dangers to patients of the modern bioethics movement.Follow WesleyProfileTwitterFacebook Share The case was argued in an appeals court recently. Note the circular argument. From the Times Union story: “A Summary of the Evidence for Intelligent Design”: The Study Guide The story reports that the judges were skeptical. Let us hope so. Animal welfare arises out of human exceptionalism. It accepts the unique value of human beings and the moral propriety of owning animals. But it also comprehends our duty to treat animals humanely, the definition of which will depend on the capacities and characteristics of each animal, and which is always subject to improvement and change. Congratulations to Science Magazine for an Honest Portrayal of Darwin’s Descent of Mancenter_img Email Print Google+ Linkedin Twitter Share It only takes one judge wanting to make history to put animal standing on the map. The Nonhuman Rights Project and other animal-rights groups are actively searching for that one judge. Think cattle herds suing ranchers or lab animals suing universities — not to improve care but to liberate from all human use. It could bring many activities that involve the instrumental use of animals to a halt. Email Print Google+ Linkedin Twitter Share The greatest immediate threat the animal-rights movement poses to society is known as “animal standing,” that is, allowing animals to go to court to bring lawsuits. Of course, the animal litigants would be oblivious. Animal standing is designed to unleash the very well-funded animal-rights legal community to sue and sue and sue. But don’t say, “It can never happen here.” In a previous unsuccessful lawsuit involving chimps, a judge in New York’s highest court indicated he would declare chimpanzees to be legal persons and grant them habeas-corpus relief in their own name. Culture & Ethics Pushing Elephant “Personhood”Wesley J. SmithNovember 29, 2020, 7:48 AM Origin of Life: Brian Miller Distills a Debate Between Dave Farina and James Tour Moreover, a court in Argentina ruled that an orangutan was a “nonhuman person,” granted a writ of habeas corpus, and ordered the animal released from a zoo and placed in a Florida sanctuary. Our Debt to the Scientific Atheists Tagsanimal rightsanimal standinganimal welfareanimalsArgentinaBronx ZoocattlechimpsFloridahuman exceptionalismjudgesNew York StateNonhuman Rights ProjectpersonhoodPeter Moultonwrit of habeas corpus,Trending A Physician Describes How Behe Changed His MindLife’s Origin — A “Mystery” Made AccessibleCodes Are Not Products of PhysicsIxnay on the Ambriancay PlosionexhayDesign Triangulation: My Thanksgiving Gift to Alllast_img


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top