In Yong’s article “ Of Primates and Personhood”, he talks about how nonhuman organisms should be given human rights. He says that apes should be given rights because they aren’t property and they are the most closest relatives to us. Yong gives an example with Hiasl, a former research chimpanzee, who “hangs on being legally declared a person”.
I disagree with the view of giving human rights to apes because they aren’t actually “humans”. I do think that apes should be treated with more respect but not be extended ape rights. As Frans de Waal said, “...but if we give rights to apes,what would be the compelling reason not to give rights to monkeys, dogs, rats, and so on?” There are a lot of people, especially the wealthy, who treat their dogs or pets better than they do to relatives or any other individual. If animals also had rights, zoos would have to close down and anacondas would be let loose on the streets since they have the right to freedom under human rights. And next thing we know, by giving apes human rights, the apes are going to rule the world and oppress the humans like in the Planet of the Apes. So where do we draw the line? This question is difficult to answer.
Being serious now, I do think all creatures that feel pain shouldn’t be mistreated or used in insignificant research.One example I remember reading for an anatomy research paper, was the use of cosmetics on animals. They used bunnies to try their product but in the process mistreated them. Their eyes were held open for 24 hours with the product implemented just to see the side effects it would bring. Now this is where we can draw the line of ethics and have to prevent this treatment.
So what I think is that human rights shouldn’t be given to apes but they should only be respected. As De Waal said, “What if we drop all this talk of rights and instead advocate a sense of obligation?...foster in humans an ethic of caring.” This emphasis how we as humans should be able to use logic to determine when something is ethical or unethical. Treat every living thing with respect.
I as well agree with you that we shouldn't give rights to apes because as you said it, they are not "humans." Human rights are meant for humans not apes, especially other animals like snake, rats, and dogs. If we let animals have human rights, then like you said, it will be crazy in the streets, and there wouldn't be no zoos, which is really kind of barbaric. In the end, we shouldn't give nonhuman organisms human rights.
ReplyDeleteI agree Estefany. The idea giving animals human rights it completely bizarre. I do believe that animals who are locked up in cages and are being experimented on deserve more respect, however, I do not think we should go as far as extending human rights to them. Perhaps the best idea would be just to release animals from captivity and release them back into their natural habitats. Also, scientists must stop testing on animals. The easiest way to give animals their rights is to let them live their own lives in the wild where they cannot be harmed and bothered by human interference.
ReplyDeleteCamille, I totally agree with you on the notion that us, as humans, should not give rights to animals. When you mentioned the testing, however, I found it agreeable yet contradicting. I also think we should stop the testing but then again, it helps the human race to grow scientifically and discover new medicines. On that topic, I honestly do not know what to think but I just found it interesting that you said to stop the testing. It's crazy because I agree and disagree at the same time!
DeleteI agree with you Estefany, I don't think that human rights should be extended to apes because they are animals and we're humans. Although we may have much in common with them, we're not the same. However, I do think that these animals should be treated better than they are. Especially the ones they are testing on, since they are testing on them they might as well treat them well instead of sticking them in small cages. Although I also agree with Austin when he says that we should stop testing on animals, but it does really help out the human race.
ReplyDeleteYou bring up a good point. I think it's important for people to understand that there is a fine line between humans and animals. Yes, animals carry many similarities to humans but there is still a substantial amount of differences. We are the dominant species and should be focused on our issues. However, it is true that we can improve the way we treat animals.
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree with you becaus even though animals do a have soft spot like many of us humans they are animals and they live a different way. Now if the people wanted to grant the animals some type of rights they would have added it to the bill of rights but of course they didn't. Even though many people in the world do treat some animals with disrespect we would reconsider on how we treat them because I feel that one day animals might become ahead of us (which will probably never be true) but we should always treat them with the respect they deserve.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on your point. Even thought I believe that all animals are capable of feeling pain, the world just wouldn't work out if we gave extended rights to everyone. And just because we understand them, that doesn't mean that they understand us. What's going to stop them from doing the wrong things with their extended rights. While they do deserve better treatment, the line has to be drawn somewhere.
ReplyDelete