Do Chimpanzees Deserve Rights?

Every living on this planet should be given the same and equal rights.

As much as we want to believe the human race shall rule over every other living beings just because we have 'intelligence', doesn't mean there is no consequences in doing so.

We have done so much harm to living creatures over the last couple of decades for the sake of progress, it will be a cold shower when we wake up from this nightmare and realize what we have done.

So yes, to answer your question, they should have the same equal rights to live freely as us.

beezzer
reply to post by crazyewok

 

I was watching AminalPlanet and all I saw was screeching, screaming, flinging poo. . . . . oh wait, that was CSPAN.

I was reminded of Family reunions but I digress...

reply to post by St0rD


I think that humans should assign themselves fewer rights: namely revoke the rights to rape pillage and mindlessly destroy.

KellyPrettyBear
reply to post by beezzer

 

Have you ever read "the third chimpanzee" by jared diamond? It's in my top 10 of books 8n human history. For me personally.

Can't say that I have. Will look at it though.

St0rD
Every living on this planet should be given the same and equal rights.

Remind the bear that mauls you on your next hike in the woods that they are violating your rights.

I mean, that bear will have little choice to recongise and comply like the civilised creature it is, correct?

lupodigubbio

benrl
Non-human rights...


Lets start working on hammering out all the HUMAN rights abuses the world faces before we start fighting for flipper and Bubbles rights...


In a time when children are sold into sex slavery, where torture is common place, and hunger is rampant, it is the height of Ass hattery to even begin fighting the "animals have rights too" fight.

Oh look the "Me first, you second" mentality. Talk about ass hattery. How about both simultaneously? Are we that inept of a species that we can't distribute respect and compassion to each other AND all creatures?

Its sorta of a clean your house before you seek to clean the houses of others mentality.

The opposite of which is this anti-humanist bs that we must treat the animals better than us.

Go look up statistics on child abuse, and your damn right its a me first mentality.

How many of these "animal rights" people ignore human rights first, they ignore the crys of people we understand and seek out those that "might" be sentient...

This most certainly is a case where "me" first should not only be the case, but is the only sensible thing to do.

How can we expect to help any creature when humanity can't handle its own household.

We already have animal cruelty laws, no need to make it ridiculous and grant them "human rights" when there are still humans that don't have those rights.

catfishjoe
www.cnn.com...

I find it disgusting and barbaric these animals are captured, drugged and abused just for us humans.

They need to incorporate. Corporations are people.


Lets hope an advance Alien civilization doesn't show up that is equally egotistical as a species as humans are. However, mother nature is a cruel Biz@rch too and Animals don't treat their prey any better. Mother Nature does not paint a rosy picture of compassion.

KellyPrettyBear
reply to post by St0rD

 

I think that humans should assign themselves fewer rights: namely revoke the rights to rape pillage and mindlessly destroy.

I must have missed where anyone ever in the history of the Earth asserted those acts as rights.

Care to educate the thread? Thanks.

reply to post by TheWrightWing


Defacto rights.

TheWrightWing
reply to post by catfishjoe

 

No, barbaric would be not using animals to find cures and treatments for human health.

As I recall, barbarians historically never had an interest in treating human malady.

Animals can only posses the rights they respect for others. Which is to say, none.

Animals are a human responsibility and deserve compassion.

Why use animals? Why not use pedophiles, rapists, murders and other guilty scum? Kill two birds with one stone. Leave bobo out if it. Stick some unknown drug into a guy who rapes little boys. We have prisons full if scum that's milking the system and the taxpayers. Leave the chimps alone.

KellyPrettyBear
reply to post by TheWrightWing

 

Defacto rights.

We are discussing human rights, and how leftists are laughably attempting to corrupt our laws to apply them to animals, who cannot possess what they cannot recognise.

Sure, why not? They seem as smart or smarter than the vast majority of Americans these days anyway.

catfishjoe

Why use animals? Why not use pedophiles, rapists, murders and other guilty scum? Kill two birds with one stone. Leave bobo out if it. Stick some unknown drug into a guy who rapes little boys. We have prisons full if scum that's milking the system and the taxpayers. Leave the chimps alone.

Are you referred to as "Catfish Joe" because you refuse to catch and consume catfish?

As I suspected, the entire animals rights agenda once again reveals itself for the anti-human effort it is.

Should we imprison chimpanzees for violating laws?

Yes or no?

So yes, to answer your question, they should have the same equal rights to live freely as us.

Really....

So let me ask you this hypothetical question, you are driving down the road late one night, and you take a turn, as you come out of the turn you are suddenly faced with a dilemma. In the road in front of you there is a 7 year old boy on his bike heading strait for your car, if you don't swerve the car you will kill him, but if you do that you will kill the litter of kittens that for some reason has been placed on the other side of the road

Now if you truly believe that humans and animals should have equal rights then you must believe that both the boy and the litter of kittens have a equal value as living beings as such its now a 50:50 if you swerve or not. But then if you do swerve and save the boy but kill the kittens you will have killed 3 or 4 little cats for the sake of one human child. Therefore, if you really do believe that humans and animals should have equal rights then by that logic you would have to kill the little boy and and save the kittens.

So who do you kill the little boy or the litter of kittens some irresponsible idiot has placed on the road?

that is the fallacy with your point.

no rational person would ever do that, kill a little boy to save a bunch of kittens.

you can then take this hypothetical argument and use it in different applications.

For example, should we test this new drug that could kill us first on 10 humans, or on 100 chimps just to make sure. if we all have equal rights as you seem to believe then we should test it on the 10 humans first.

again, chimps are not humans, they are called human rights for a reason they apply to humans.

reply to post by TheWrightWing


Im not discussing that. I'm discussing reality.

Now are a lot of 'leftists' messed up? Sure.

MystikMushroom
Sure, why not? They seem as smart or smarter than the vast majority of Americans these days anyway.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

or people who post these pictures online of "OMG look at them slaughtering that piggy, thats where your bacon comes from you filthy carnivore"....

so?

I like Bacon, if little piggy needs to die so i can eat so be it.

Most vegans dont even have a real issue with meat eating, the issue is the way the animals live and die.

Their whole life is one of physical and mental torture, if you dont care, truly dont care and arent just being glib, then you are a psychopath plain and simple.

Watch Earthlings and tell me it doesnt affect you and you dont care, I dare you!!!!

reply to post by TheWrightWing



I catch and eat catfish to feed my family. I'm not sure how chimp tastes.

reply to post by TheWrightWing


The chimps that eats a ladies face off? Kill it. They aren't pets. I hate monkeys. They are gross. Their asses look disgusting and they throw poop. Reminds me of my uncle dee tho I can't voych for his bum. I don't think they deserve human rights. I just don't think they should be in zoos or used to try new drugs. Like I said...that what Jerry Sandusky is for.

OtherSideOfTheCoin

So yes, to answer your question, they should have the same equal rights to live freely as us.

Really....

So let me ask you this hypothetical question, you are driving down the road late one night, and you take a turn, as you come out of the turn you are suddenly faced with a dilemma. In the road in front of you there is a 7 year old boy on his bike heading strait for your car, if you don't swerve the car you will kill him, but if you do that you will kill the litter of kittens that for some reason has been placed on the other side of the road?

Now if you truly believe that humans and animals should have equal rights then you must believe that both the boy and the litter of kittens have a equal value as living beings as such its now a 50:50 if you swerve or not. But then if you do swerve and save the boy but kill the kittens you will have killed 3 or 4 little cats for the sake of one human child. Therefore, if you really do believe that humans and animals should have equal rights then by that logic you would have to kill the little boy and and save the kittens.

that is the fallacy with your point.

no rational person would ever do that, kill a little boy to save a bunch of kittens.

I like the example you provided my friend because I think it proves very efficiently how we humans perceive ourselves.
We really do believe we are a superior race, don't we?

And of course the rationnal mind will try to convince ourselves that we ABSOLUTELY HAVE to save the 7 years old children, because, you know, he is human, and we deserve to live more than a kitten.

But sometimes, if you look at life in a more withdrawn view from our beliefs and stereotypes, you will quickly realize everything that lives is equal and infinite.

The Flow of life is in all living things and life itselfs cannot be measured and understand fully by the mind. Only the way of life expressing itselfs in multiple living beings is different.

Let me give you also an example -

Take the same story set as you did, but change the kittens for a 2,000 years tree. And now imagine you have the same driver going at tremendous speed, threatening the ancient tree OR the 7 years old boy.

What choice should be the right one then?

What is the difference between a tree, which has been transforming CO2 to O2 for millenia and given us all the right to live, or a 7 years old boy? I'm looking towards your answer mate.