Defining Person Trailer: Exploring Legal Rights for Great Apes

[CrystalCastles2o11]

they want stop all programs to find Anti-AIDS medication.

they want death for all Gays.

AIDS still mutation and still be more strong...like other virus!....in one day AIDS will have everyone....and all will die.

[ta2joe13]

what a bunch of bleeding heart liberal bullshit

[InYourFaceNewYorker]

Also, are you going to interview Richard Dawkins for this?

[InYourFaceNewYorker]

This is wonderful. I hope you finish this! I'd love to see it! How does one support the Great Ape Project?

[beastinblack]

Laurie Pycroft, humans are more important? oh right 6.8 billion of us and will soon be 9 billion, we are choking this planet to death at the expense of animals. RIP the Orangutan species. Us 'important' humans are killing them off thanks to consumerism I guess that makes us special...

[silverbackman]

@beastinblack Consumerism and old western idea in general is what is destroying the other animals. Now that the white man doesn't consider non-whites as animals, all the races of man are now targeting animals (including the consumerists non-western peoples as well). Such a shame, we are as much animals as any other.

[beastinblack]

What we are talking about is preventing habitat destruction and preventing poaching by putting someone in jail for killing a great ape.

[aliveinsd]

Hey. My dog is a person to me. But I don't insist that you believe that to be true in his case. Nor will I waste anymore time on said subject. Being an "ape" does not make non-Human apes any more special than wolf, tiger, rabbit, octopus, dolphin, mouse, etc. Just put them where they belong and then, allow nature do the rest. (mice are 90% DNA match to Human) So????

[silverbackman]

Really? So other great apes being in the same family as humans means nothing? Do you realize that the difference between a human and a chimp is like the difference between a jaguar and puma? So if it was jaguars who ended becoming the dominate species, would it make sense for jaguars to subject all other felines despite being in the same family?

Great apes are nearly "human"...if you don't give them fundamental rights what would you give fundamental rights? Stop comparing dogs to great apes.

[windap55]

I believe that animals are important, and they matter to me.... I believe it is our responsibility to do right by them....

[silverbackman]

Perhaps we should do away with this outdated western concept of "humans vs animals". Honestly what is the real physical difference between humans and other animals? The main difference lies in our intellect....so does that mean we are going to treat less intelligent humans like animals? Babys have less intelligence than many animals, should we treat human babys like animals too?

Honestly all these concepts of "animals" are all based off outdated religious principles.

[ivanmikhailov]

And what of infants and the severely mentally disabled? Where is their conscience? Shall we deny them basic rights because they don't understand ethics? The underlying reason to grant some non-human animals rights is their capacity to feel intense psychological pain and physical suffering. Whether or not they're intelligent enough to return the favor is no more important than in the case of babies and those with mental illness.

[silverbackman]

AMEN!!!!! Thank you bro for pointing out many of these obvious facts.

It seems like people still like to cling to old values, even the ones who have given up religion. Of course if you are some bible nut religious fundie you will believe animals are given to man for their "pleasure". I want to smack every religious nut in sight who be-little the suffering animals go through.

[ivanmikhailov]

It really sounds strange to me to hear people make the false dichotomy of "humans and animals." I don't see what's so difficult about grasping the fact that humans are animals as well. The more that people come to realize this, the more clearly they'll understand the issue: the qualities that matter (having interests, feeling pain, etc.) are not exclusive to human beings. To those who disagree, I challenge them to name one quality found in all humans that is not found in any other animal.

[ellinovatcheva]

Humans act with conscience - animals do not. A very interesting read is the essay by Ilana Mercer, which is found in several anthologies on the Animal Rights debate. The argument behind this is that when an animal attacks a person, it does so instinctually, with no conscience. A human, however, has a developed conscience and knows that certain actions are wrong. I am pro-animal rights, but it's a good idea to understand both sides of the issue.

[ivanmikhailov]

@ellinovatcheva where's your response?

[ellinovatcheva]

:D My response? I don't make a point of haunting YouTube every minute of my day, so my response is here, just not immediately. Actually, what you mention with infants and severely mentally disabled is in fact on of the strongest arguments for animal rights. It is usually explored by Peter Singer, who is probably the most prominent advocate on Animal Rights. I suggest you read his book Animal Liberation. At the same time, however, I must say that humans instinctually protect their own kind.

[ellinovatcheva]

By instinct, a baby or severely mentally disabled person is more important to us than an animal. Technically, there should be no difference, but their is. I really suggest you read Peter Singer's arguments.

[ivanmikhailov]

I'm very familiar with Singer's arguments. I agree--he presents a very well thought out argument. Of course--instinct does lead us to protect our own species more. I think you'd agree, though, that instinct is no way to determine ethics. Instinct also compels us to acts of violence, rape, and xenophobia.

[silverbackman]

Exactly. And honestly the notion of "instinct" is based off of nothing but speculative philosophy. There is no physical organ in organisms called "instincts" these are just mere concepts. Of course humans are going to have a prejudice for anyone outside their species.....I bet a chimpanzee shows preference to their species too. If humans want to really separate themselves morally from animals, we should be able to move beyond these dichotomies of "our species vs other species".

[aliveinsd]

@silverbackman You are so very wrong, and in so many ways. Go take a pill and leave decent people alone. Honestly....

Please don't knock again, as I won't be answering the door.

[silverbackman]

Is that the best you can do? You can't counter with anything logical, even your religious bullshit. How am I wrong? You can say the theory of gravity is wrong and tell scientists to go "take a pill" but it doesn't make it so.

Any chance you might be able to get your head out of your ass? Or is that too much to ask for? Figures.

[silverbackman]

And yet no one would ever suggest treating babies and mentally disabled people like sub-humans, why should many animals get the same treatment? Especially animals that are in our family. I can't imagine if a jaguar became the intelligence species that they would automatically treat all cat species like other animals.

[silverbackman]

Oh please. Stop speaking out of your ass. If were an orangutan you would be feeling the same way towards your species. Honestly the attempt to separate humans from animals on "moral conscience" is nothing more than religious based babble. What's next does an invisible sky daddy live in the sky?

[beastinblack]

@silverbackman moral conscience?! tell that to hitler and Iran. 

[silverbackman]

@beastinblack Or American politicians. So many humans lack "moral conscience" that to say humans generally have it is kinda a stretch.