Slavery protections for animals? Judge to decide

[bemildred]

SAN DIEGO (AP) — A federal judge for the first time in U.S. history heard arguments Monday in a case that could determine whether animals enjoy the same constitutional protection against slavery as human beings.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Miller called the hearing in San Diego after Sea World asked the court to dismiss a lawsuit filed by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that names five orcas as plaintiffs in the case.

PETA claims the captured killer whales are treated like slaves for being forced to live in tanks and perform daily at its parks in San Diego and Orlando, Fla.

"This case is on the next frontier of civil rights," said PETA's attorney Jeffrey Kerr, representing the five orcas.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jS6B44Vrh8wZbJGdmlAhlNP_CIrQ?docId=404d0837c55d4aa5917e7fc6b02d8030

Edit: so my questions is: are animals "persons"?

[roody]

1. They are better persons than corporations.

[Tumbulu]

5. I agree! (nt)

[cstanleytech]

2. No, they are not.

Sorry, but the fact is they just arent people and I really doubt the judge will find for peta in this case.

[Gore1FL]

6. And if they were...

...how would we know PETA speaks for them?

There are a lot of things I agree with PETA on. They simply need to incorporate reality into their agenda. I bet they could get a majority to support favorable working conditions for animals raised to be food. They aren't going to get a majority to stop biology. Their attempts to do so put them in the same range as "abstinence-only" sex education people and Libertarians on the "How far along have we thought this through" meter. Stunts like this harm the good they could do on other fronts.

[The Traveler]

27. Define "people"

Is membership in the human race required to qualify as "people"? Or are there other criteria in your view that confer "personhood" to a creature?

Trav

[cstanleytech]

28. You and me or atleast I assume your a person.....unless of course your claiming your a dog.

[Posteritatis]

54. "Person" in the legal sense has some pretty specific, non-biological definitions

Membership in the human race didn't autoqualify a lot of people as persons until embarrassingly recently. (As a local example, in Canadian law women weren't persons until 1929.)

Personally and wildly-hypothetically speaking, I don't think being a member of Homo sapiens should be necessary to qualify, though I also don't know what precisely qualifies presently if anything does. (I have plenty of ideas for what would qualify, but that's getting even more hypothetical than this case.)

[Drale]

3. God PETA gets stupider by the day

they give people who are really fighting against cruelty to animals a bad name.

[wordpix]

26. Disagree. This is a creative way to bring the plight of animals for entertainment to public atten-

tion.

The orcas were captured as babies and taken away from their families. They have been kept in small pool enclosures ever since. They were once wild and now are kept for people's entertainment in a tiny confined area. They are intelligent and cannot exercise their free will. They are slaves to people's stupid ideas of entertainment.

[Daemonaquila]

33. Not creative - moronic.

PETA is the worst thing to happen to animal rights in this country. Any remaining message they have beyond "Gimme money!" is lost in their idiotic stunts. They have no concept of biology or science, just a 7 year old's "aw, lookit da pretty bunny!" mentality.

[wordpix]

46. Smithfield Farms and McDonald's CEOs ---is that you?

[slackmaster]

57. There are plenty of creative ways of doing that without wasting valuable court time

[Posteritatis]

50. They certainly do, but I still find this case really interesting. (nt)

[jody]

4. So is eating a hamburger cannibalism? ntv

[bemildred]

8. Murder I would think.

Cannibalism would be cows eating cows, mad cow disease and all that.

[veganlush]

9. in a way, it is

our fellow mortals don't deserve the treatment they receive and most people know it. That's why many people bury their heads in the sand and deny that they are the very reason that we have institutional torture.

[humblebum]

22. Then that would naturally mean that all animals possess rights to be protected, so

we certainly must stop animals from killing other animals. Where does the foolishness end. Man is a natural part of the food chain just as every other living creature.

You said, "fellow mortals don't deserve the treatment they receive and most people know it." - that is nothing but pathetic pandering to false guilt and emotion. Absolutely ridiculous!

[veganlush]

10. When people made cattle into cannibals

by feeding scrap slaughter house by-products to their cattle, mother nature fought back with mad cow disease. factory farming is wrong. More people have their heads in the sand on this issue than on any other issue I know of. Many "animals lovers" are angered and repulsed by the practice of some Asian cultures of eating canines. They should feel exactly the same way about what we do to pigs to be consistent in their views. Boycott cruelty.

[The Traveler]

31. No ... but in today's context, it is a mindless and damaging act

From an ethical viewpoint, factory farming is an abomination. If the cops ever caught you treating an animal like the factory farmed cow or pig is treated, you would be arrested. And would probably slip and fall several times on the way to the jail cell. It really is that abominable.

Equally discomforting, animals maintained in those conditions are sustained by the use of growth hormones, antibiotics, and GMO crops. As someone mentioned, even animal parts are ground up and added to the feed ... and that's ain't wise when you are feeding herbivores.

Wanna know why antibiotics are less and less effective each year? Consider the above. And then dwell on the implications.

Want to reduce your contribution to world carbon output? The single biggest thing you can do ... by far ... is to assume a vegan diet. You cannot get even close to that reduction by giving up your car and pedaling a bi-cycle.

Factory farming requires lots of plant based foods for livestock ... and that means lots of water and fertilizer. I refer you to the summary Wikipedia article for some top level facts and stats: Evironmental Impact of Meat Production
The point is ... factory farming of meat animals is a direct contributor to the production of oxygen dead zones in ocean environments like the Gulf of Mexico, and that has a huge impact on fisheries ... and is directly related to the sudden spike in jellyfish populations witnessed in such regions. Massive and unprecedented jellyfish blooms have actually caused the shut down of nuclear reactors in Japan, Israel, Britain and America by clogging cooling systems. Here's just one case, from Scotland of all places: Jellyfish force Torness nuclear reactor shutdown

So ... eating that hamburger supports a merciless industry that reminds one of Lovecraft's worst nightmares. This industry also contributes to accelerating climate change through carbon emissions, and destruction of ocean environments through nitrate pollution. The practices of this industry promote cancer and other diseases by dosing its consumers with various toxins and growth hormones, while accelerating the evolution of antibiotic resistant microbes through indiscriminate use of these vital medicines.

There is NOTHING about factory farming or the purchase of its product that resembles natural predation in any way, and your attempt to draw that comparison is entirely specious. Lions, for example, do not do this.

So ... sure. Go ahead. Chew that burger. The animal whose meat you consume lived in agony and died in terror and prolonged pain. It was likely diseased at the time it was slaughtered. You have with your purchase accelerated our rush towards climate disaster. And some kid is now suffering from an antibiotic resistant disease bred in those vast necrotic barnyards from whence your burgen came.

Enjoy your meal. Me, I'm going to stalk a rutabaga, kill it, and eat it.

Trav

[Daemonaquila]

34. I'll happily eat that burger.

From a local farm. Factory farming is atrocious, but eating meat is just fine. The answer is to know where your food comes from, and support good farmers. The factory farms that grow veggies are just as guilty of poisoning people and the planet. Going vegan solves nothing.

[RebelOne]

70. Well, I wouldn't eat that burger from any farm, local or factory.

No, eating meat is not just fine.

[veganlush]

7. The future or the animals rights cause

will be about legal rights. It's the way it must be. In the meantime, we can boycott cruelty and institutional torture by refusing to buy animal products. If you buy animal products, you are creating demand for the cruel, factory-farmed supply. Quitting the animal addiction is the biggest single thing an individual can do to help stop animal torture, to help the environment and to help their own health.

[Peregrine]

11. Let's say we give up eating cows and all of the other domesticated animals

What happens to them? We set them free into the wild? My guess that they get euthanized or starve/freeze to death or fall prey to wolves or other predators.

[TBF]

13. Gradually folks will eat less and less -

as they realize other foods are better for them. As the demand lessens they'll sell fewer - there are farms dedicated to breeding these animals solely for slaughter, so those numbers would keep going down.

I can't see a court ruling that animals=humans, but I could see anti-cruelty provisions being made stricter and that sort of thing.

[Critters2]

18. The same thing that happened to horses when we stopped using them as our primary means of

transportation. Those now living would live and die for the purposes for which they were bred, and fewer new ones would be bred. Horses weren't euthanized, nor frozen to death, nor preyed upon by predators (except to the degree that they always had been). We just stopped breeding so many of them.

[BiggJawn]

19. Uh, Google "Wild Horses"

They don't have it so nice.

[beardown]

32. Statistics might disagree with you

1949 Estimated 6 million domestic horses in America
1950's Estimated 2 million horses.

Two thirds of domestic horses disappeared in less than a decade. I doubt that there is any way that type of reduction would have occurred if there weren't mass slaughters, but I'm open to contrary theories.

The peak was around 1919 when there were estimated 26 million domestic horses. The fall from 26 million to 6 million over 30 years would be more in line with your gradual theory, but if economic conditions allow it, the horses will be eliminated in the quickest and most economically efficient method available and that's slaughter or abandonment.

We're back up to several million domestic horses again so new purposes have been found to justify the increase in numbers.

Now if horses are emancipated, there is no gradual. 7 million horses hit the road, shave their faces, and start working at McDonalds and voting republican because the repubs have been masters of manipulating horses asses for years.

[Devil_Fish]

12. Next PETA should sue for the cows.

Warning: Graphic

[pnwmom]

14. So I guess they would oppose guide dogs for the blind

and all the other service dogs.

[flexnor]

16. saw the worst service dog of all time last week

had the service dog labels etc, crossed in the middle of the street, then stuck his nose into a hole about a foot from the sidewalk and wouldnt 'pull up' when it's person tried to get it back on the sidewalk

[pnwmom]

65. And then there are service dogs like this sweetie.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/magazine/wonder-dog.html?pagewanted=all

[boppers]

24. Yes, they oppose having service animals.

Pets, too, they consider that as slavery as well.

They are not animal "lovers" in the sense most people who work with, or care for animals, are.

[flexnor]

15. 'And another thing, we're not dogs anymore, we're canine Americans'

saw that in a new yorker cartoon years ago, about 4 dogs confronting a bewidered man in his easy chair

back when such a thing was considered a joke

[McCamy Taylor]

17. Orcas are not like "animals". Their intelligence is similar to that of humans.

They have language, they are able to think creatively, they have emotions. In the wild, Orcas have never attacked a human being. They only do that when they are kept in captivity. That should tell us what they think about being kept in tanks.

A ruling in favor of the Orcas in this case would not set a precedent for the treatment of farm animals, because the Orcas are much, much more intelligent and civilized that any farm animal.

[virgogal]

23. Why should an intelligent animal get better treatment than

a less intelligent one?

[Posteritatis]

52. In theory, it would have greater capacity for suffering

You or I can experience suffering about things that, say, a dog or horse couldn't, and they could experience things that other creatures couldn't, and so on. I worry more about the treatment of a dog than, say, a fruit fly for that reason, though I also recognize there's a gigantic continuum in there and have yet to puzzle out the exact point along that continuum where I start feeling uncomfortable (and why).

Of course, in practice figuring out who can experience precisely what is be fiendishly difficult. It's the kind of thing people have been arguing about for centuries already, with people only really noticing/discovering a lot of firm evidence (beyond the obvious "pain hurts things" type) relatively recently.

[virgogal]

68. Thanks for your response to my post. It will

give me something to think about.

[BiggJawn]

20. Who sets the minimum wage for Service Animals?

3 hots, a cot, and Vet care enough?

[quakerboy]

21. My question is

If animals can be afforded protection against slavery, do we not owe our Corporate Persons the same rights?

[wordpix]

25. Corporate persons already have the "rights" of slave owners so

we don't owe them a thing. They're already keeping US in slavery, animals as well as people.

[cstanleytech]

29. That was an error on the courts part as would ruling that animals are people be an error.

Not that I believe it will happen in the end with scotus, the judge hearing the case though? Not sure but if he does you can bet he will be the butt of many jokes.

[quakerboy]

38. Oh, I'm pretty sure that we owe them this

Just think of the havoc if a corporation could no longer be owned by a person or another corporation. If all of, say, Bain's sub owned companies were suddenly emancipated. Just as an example.

[azurnoir]

30. Interesting could put a new spin on that spay and neuter thing

I once asked a vet tech if it was possible to to do something akin to a vasectomy on a male animal (cat in this case) rather that simply castrating them, she told me that the idea of doing that was unethical and cruel and should not ever be considered, my thought was that it was too bad the cat could not weigh in on that one

[bemildred]

44. Nobody ever cares what the cat thinks, I quite agree. Very narcissistic.

Though it is true that your average male domestic cat is better off without all that testosterone. We had a "natural male" cat when I was a kid, and he was always being patched up.

We had a thread in the Men's Group that seems most a propos:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/111496

[Ter]

35. It it, but so what?

I love my two slaves, feed them and take care of them very well. They both love me too.

[cstanleytech]

39. Are you sure they are the slaves? After all if you have a pet you have to feed them

and bath them and in the case of a dog walk them so who exactly is the slave?

[Ter]

49. I think forcing them to live with me and not letting them out kinda makes them slaves

Especially since they are over 18...Well, in cat years anyway.

[Posteritatis]

53. Pft, cats? They're management, not slaves. (nt)

[cstanleytech]

55. Do they make you your food or do you make them theirs? Do they get you something to drink or do you

get them drinks?
Do they clean your bathroom or do you clean theirs?
If you look at all the list its us humans who are the slaves to our animals.

[LisaL]

69. But they don't work.

And if you kick them out they will die.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

36. Legally, this is a trend.

New categories of protected classes of people are recognized in the law, as time progresses.
I went to law school between 1980-1985, and back then there was no such thing as the class of homosexual people having any civil rights.

The idea of cetaceans having rights like humans do, because they are as intelligent or more intelligent than humans, has some legal validity, I think.

[Douglas Carpenter]

37. redemption draweth nigh

Last edited Tue Feb 7, 2012, 10:43 AM - Edit history (2)

Beasts of England, Beasts of Ireland,

Beasts of every land and clime,

Hearken to my joyful tidings

Of the Golden future time.

Soon or late the day is coming,

Tyrant Man shall be o'erthrown,

And the fruitful fields of England

Shall be trod by beasts alone.

Rings shall vanish from our noses,

And the harness from our back,

Bit and spur shall rust forever,

Cruel whips no more shall crack.

Riches more than mind can picture,

Wheat and barley, oats and hay,

Clover, beans and mangel-wurzels

Shall be ours upon that day.

Bright will shine the fields of England,

Purer shall its waters be,

Sweeter yet shall blow its breezes

On the day that sets us free.

For that day we all must labour,

Though we die before it break;

Cows and horses, geese and turkeys,

All must toil for freedom's sake.

Beasts of England, Beasts of Ireland,

Beasts of every land and clime,

Hearken well, and spread my tidings

Of the Golden future time.

- From George Orwell's Anmial Farm

.

[dipsydoodle]

40. If it was to be determined that animals are "persons"

then those who use non humane mouse traps will have a real problem.

[MFrohike]

41. Yeesh

A logically consistent idea taken to absurd extreme by zealots. It's funny and depressing.

I do think a better relationship needs to be worked out with animals, particularly the more intelligent. I don't much care for the idea of "ownership" but I also recognize it's an established framework that can be used to regulate obnoxious behavior. That being said, the idea of animal citizens is stupid. PETA seems to be missing the part where citizen have duties, not just rights (hell, I could say that about most of the country). I don't see a practical way to get animals to fill out a 1040, serve on a jury, be conscripted (well, actually I hear the Navy is doing just fine with that one), vote, etc. That pesky communication problem is too big a hurdle.

This is nothing but a stunt. I can't take the PETA people seriously because they refuse to be serious. When they come up with a solution to the problem of animal citizen's rights and duties, I'll bother to listen to them. Until then, they're peddling a story loonier than Ron Paul's solution to unemployment by firing half the federal government.

[GliderGuider]

43. PETA is the comedy-theater marketing team for Deep Ecology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_ecology

Deep ecology is a contemporary ecological philosophy that recognizes an inherent worth of all living beings, regardless of their instrumental utility to human needs. The philosophy emphasizes the interdependence of organisms within ecosystems and that of ecosystems with each other within the biosphere. It provides a foundation for the environmental, ecology and green movements and has fostered a new system of environmental ethics.

[div class="excerpt" style="border:solid 1px #000000"]Principles

1. The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have value in themselves (synonyms: intrinsic value, inherent value). These values are independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.
   
2. Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves.
   
3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital human needs.
   
4. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease.
   
5. Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.
   
6. Policies must therefore be changed. These policies affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.
   
7. The ideological change is mainly that of appreciating life quality (dwelling in situations of inherent value) rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great.
   
8. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to try to implement the necessary changes.

No matter how much we may mock PETA's absurdist exuberance, the underlying principles are well-founded.

On edit: To answer bemindred's original question directly, IMO animals are not persons, but they do have intrinsic worth and we have the moral obligation to respect that worth. I have no inherent objection to eating animals (food chains are a part of nature after all), but I have a big problem with the lack of ethics, respect and mindfulness that characterizes our current relationship with them.

[Coyote_Bandit]

45. I have a small dog

He had been dumped at a vets office, had lived there in a kennel for a couple of months and was in immediate need of a home when he claimed me.

I immediately enrolled him in an obedience course that started the following week. We have successfully completed 3 obedience courses and are now enrolled in a fourth class. The dog enjoys his training exercises and we will likely continue to do some competitive obedience work. I try to work with th dog about an hour each day and there is certain behavior that is always expected and required of the dog. Although the dog has not yet begun working as a therapy dog he has completed the training and testing to do so.

I'm guessing PETA considers this slavery.

The dog's life is much better because of his "slave" labor. He has been socialized with both other animals and a wide range of people, he has a home where he is cared for, well fed, sheltered from the elements, and groomed, and he is provided with regular medical and dental care. His good behavior affords him house privieges because he is trusted not to destroy or defile the house and its contents. He has regular outings that afford him interesting activities - and can expect that to continue through his life.

A few years back our local news reported on a business that imported illegal workers that they housed in dorms and used as slave labor. They were poorly housed, poorly fed, poorly clothed. They didn't receive medical or dental care and they were denied the ability to leave the premises where they worked and were housed. I'm guessing that if some PETA executives shared their experience they'd hav e a whole new understanding of slavery.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

47. Wow, this could be truly groundbreaking.

I will be watching this closely -- as an animal rights supporter, I have always believed animals deserve a different legal classification than "property". I generally do not support animals kept in captivity unless done so with the utmost care, and I don't believe orcas and dolphins can ever be kept in the best conditions due to their size and intelligence.

[tawadi]

48. It will be interesting to see what happens with this case. eom

[bemildred]

60. Yes, I don't see how you can call a corporation a "person" and still deny that to killer whales. nt

[tawadi]

62. Those captured killer whales are treated like slaves

And for their size, the tanks are very small. Sort of like putting a person in an 8 x 10 cell.

[bemildred]

63. Like property. Slaves are property.

Once you start seeing the world as property, pretty soon, anything you fancy looks like it could be property too.

[Snake Alchemist]

51. I often refer to myself as my dogs' master.

I wonder if I will be asked to testify.

[cstanleytech]

58. Well you can refer to yourself as the master if you want but which one

in the relationship walks which one to go to the bathroom? In the end its people who are the slaves............to the animals.

[Snake Alchemist]

59. I just open the back door. :)

Thank goodness I don't walk them 3 times a day like I used to. One of the reasons I bought a house with a large yard.

[cstanleytech]

64. So your the butler slave for the......same deal either way.

After all they just look at you with those eyes and I bet you go all gooey and melt and obey their commands to open the door.

[slackmaster]

56. Your question regarding persons is right to the point, I can't imagine Miller finding that Orcas...

...have standing.

[bemildred]

61. I have a feeling it would be appealed, and appealed, and appealed, if he did. nt

[Muskypundit]

66. They need to let all the Orcas go

Or put them into much much larger enclosures. It is animal cruelty to be in a little tank like that. I hope that ruling can be made without making me have to go vegan and "free" my dog.

[flvegan]

67. Funny how folks look at this and think of it in the context of themselves.

"They aren't human" is the new "they aren't white men"

Shameful how so many lack empathy but God forbid they have to think of where their food comes from. But then, bacon is delicious and stupid is rampant. Not that one equals the other, lest a jury have reason to think so.