By Jennifer O'Connor – Special to CNN
The 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits the condition of slavery. But it does not refer to a "person" or any particular class of victims.
So, can animals be slaves?
In a precedent-setting case, PETA, three marine-mammal experts and two former orca (killer whale) trainers are suing SeaWorld on behalf of five orcas who were taken from their home by force, locked up, put to work and never allowed to leave - the very definition of slavery.
Corky, Kasatka and Ulises went from exploring the vast seas with their families to a sterile tank barely larger than their own bodies at SeaWorld San Diego. Tilikum and Katina float listlessly between performances at SeaWorld Orlando. Now all five orcas will get their day in court.
The case - the first-ever seeking to apply the 13th Amendment to nonhuman animals – represents a growing trend among a new generation of legal advocates who recognize that society moved away from the outdated notion that animals are unfeeling things a long time ago. It is time for our laws to follow suit.
The lawsuit calls for the five orcas to be released to a more appropriate environment, such as a coastal sanctuary. Protected sea pens would allow these orcas greater freedom of movement; the opportunity to see, sense and communicate with their wild cousins and other ocean animals; and the ability to feel the tides and waves and engage in behavior that is natural to their species.
Orcas in the wild lead rich, complex lives. They are intelligent animals that work cooperatively, form multifaceted relationships, communicate using distinct dialects and swim up to 100 miles every day.
We know that these marine mammals have sophisticated social structures. We also know that being jammed into an oversized fish bowl causes them to lose their minds. They destroy their teeth chewing on steel divider bars; they alternate between aggression and depression; they attack each other and sometimes they decide that they can't take one more minute and lash out against their captors - with tragic results.
These intelligent animals are held against their will. Slavery does not depend on the species of the slave any more than it depends on the race, gender or religion of the slave. The case will be heard in a U.S. federal court in February.
In another case drawing widespread interest, a New York City woman has filed a civil suit against the pet store that sold her a puppy, named Umka, who quickly developed chronic, debilitating medical conditions. The suit seeks to establish that animals are living beings, not inanimate things, and to hold the store accountable for Umka's pain, suffering and medical bills.
The legal system currently considers animals to be "property." If the legal definition of an animal is rightfully amended to recognize that animals feel emotions such as pain, joy, fear and grief, it could significantly affect the level of compensation that could be awarded when a buyer purchases an unhealthy dog born in a puppy mill – a mass-breeding facility in which animals are kept in tiny, feces-caked cages and never given any love or attention or even a chance to roll in the grass.
If successful, the lawsuit would leave pet stores financially liable for selling animals from puppy mills. No matter what the outcome, the issue has focused attention on the miserable lives ofanimals churned out in breeding mills and the far-reaching consequences of buying animalsinstead of adopting them from shelters.
Around the world, laws are being revamped to afford animals unprecedented protection. Last year, Peru's president, Alan García, signed a law banning wild animals in circuses. The decision comes on the heels of the British Parliament's unanimous vote to direct the government to introduce a similar ban. Similar legislation is also pending in Scotland, Brazil, Ecuador and Colombia.
India's minister of environment and forests issued a directive that banned the use of bulls in performances - including cruel races and other abusive spectacles. Spain's Catalonia region outlawed bullfighting. And Puerto Rico's Supreme Court recently determined that a monkey-breeding facility that would have sold primates to laboratories would not be permitted to open for business.
Increasingly, society is regarding animals not as "things" to dominate but rather as breathing, feeling beings with families, intellect and emotions. Hopefully, the laws that support that cultural evolution will follow suit.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of Jennifer O'Connor.
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
No, because they don't have any grasp of complex emotions. Just because I put a rock in a box doesn't mean im keeping that rock from living its fun-filled rocky life. Because its a rock, and all it will do if I take it out of the box is to continue being a rock until it falls apart. Don't let me catch this kind of sensationalistic crap on such a respectable blog again GPS.
You are comparing a rock to an living thing?????
By your logic we should take away the rights and protections of any retarded person whose IQ is below a certain level. I can tell you for a fact my dogs have a higher intelligence than many retarded people I have cared for. If it has a central nervous system it is sentient and shouldn't be labeled property.
Wow – so you may as well say that a brain damaged 6 year old should be able to be used as a slave, as they are unaware of their mistreatment.
MASSIVE difference between a SENTIENT being and a rock.
Good luck to PETA on this one. Although because of the ramifications when it comes to other animals, such as pigs and other livestock, there is no way they will win because of companies like McDonald's being so damn powerful.
Just remember that those burgers you are eating are down to animal slavery and other forms of abuse.
And don't give me that crap about free-range happy meat. A slave is a slave no matter how far he is allowed to roam (within the boundaries that his master has set).
So how far do we take this particular debate? Farmed vegetables, cereals and fruits are taken from their natural environment, bred in slavery, executed en masse and subjected to some pretty horrendous treatment. I'm sure you'll try and split hairs about at what level we stop calling a living thing a slave and start calling it lunch, but that's just semantics. Should we push for the elimination of agriculture in all it's forms or do we recognise that sometimes, fringe nutbags should not control public debate?
Shane – there is also a massive difference between animals and plants.
Animals we KNOW have feelings and are self aware.
Plants are different. They have no central nervous system nor a brain. The "myth" that they feel pain has be shown to be that – a myth. The claims about plants having "feelings" were by an Indian scientist ( I don't recall his name, but a quick google should turn him up pretty quickly ) who also claimed that it was possible that plants could telepathically communicate with humans, and that rocks and metal also have feelings and can do the same. He was a Hindu, who believed that all things have a life-force, and was trying to prove this.
Also, when we grow plants we don't have to whip them, or abuse them in any other manner, to TRAIN them to perform for us. If there was no money to be made from zoos, circuses etc then the so called "carers" wouldn't give a damn about the animals.
As I said, splitting hairs. The fact remains that it is alive. Do we have a right to take a living thing out of it's environment, subject it to (for want of a better word) slavery and mass murder just to feed us? The presence of a central nervous system is not sufficient to determine a just course of action – invertebrates do not have a CNS and are capable of feeling pain, and even something as simple as bacteria will attempt to escape from adverse stimuli. A plant by its very nature cannot escape – it is rooted to a single place. If that is where we draw the line – a capacity to escape from adverse stimuli rather than a response – then simply nailing a cow to the ground resolves all moral issues. The second point I would make is that our understanding of other life is still limited and while we do not yet understand enough about plant life to make a call about responses to adverse stimuli, I would argue that ignorance is never an excuse. As an enlightened society should we not be motivated by ideals?
Shane...your logic is so horrendously stupid it's almost as if you never received any formal education at all. Unless of course, you are just arguing to argue. In which case; you made a valiant attempt at crafting a point, even used some big words...but at the end of the day buddy; only an idiot draws comparison between a Killer Whale and a fruit/ vegetable. You, my friend, are clearly someone who understands very little about biology, zoology, and maybe just intelligence in general. ...just, wow...
VampireJack: I agree to a degree, should animals be in a circuis? No, should they be tortured, no. However, animals, wether you like it or not, are food, just as other animals are food to other animals. We should still be able to eat meat, that is part of being human, we are omnivore, however, that does not mean that we should miss treat our food. These feed lots today are torture to these animals and should stop, but responsible breeding for food should be allowed. Even ants will tend to affids to farm them for their nectar, farming is not uniqe to humans, we just do it better.
Chris, we don't eat people because we've decided that it's immoral to do so. We do eat plants and animals, and raise them for that purpose. As a society the idea of cannibalism is where we draw the line. What PETA (and VampireJack) is saying is that we should move where we draw the line, based on what exactly? The idea that something is alive? Because it's been removed from its natural environment and bent to our purposes? All I've done is extrapolate that concept to its conclusion. Unfortunately the elimination of agriculture (slavery) will sentence billions of people to death. It's easy to be moralistic when you're being shortsighted and not considering the end result of a proposal, but that would be so horrendously stupid that I start to wonder if you have a brain in your head at all.
CynicalSam, the rock is you. Cold, heartless and belonging in a box. Of course animals are capable of complex emotions. You, on the other hand, are incapable of empathy, something that mice are able to accomplish.
A machine is also a slave by definition and one of the definitions of machine is 'An intricate natural system or organism, such as the human body' (from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/machine..) which means that slave can in fact refer to all animals and couple that with the fact that all animals can and do feel pain (without even going into emotions which we now know is a very valid point with orca) with the current climate around the world in regards to animal rights in general, will be interesting. As for puppy mills, the sooner they are all shut down the better, they are disgusting places that are run solely for financial gain with no consideration given to the deplorable lives of the breeding dogs or condition of the offspring.
Ducks Unlimited is prlbaboy pretty popular where you are. MN has a pretty large population of hunters.
Oh kintets yes. This is the only reason I was born. To find you, my long lost blogging soul-mate.
@ John S...Agreed
but sadly there are idiots with a 1 % brain function out there who are beyond uneducated and were raised in senseless, heartless, useless environment in there own lives , them their selves cant comprehend, pain is pain. Unfortunely there are a majority of waste of space like these morons filtering this planet with their Useless acts.
@ CynicalSam, you are that ROCK sweety, but doesnt mean every other living thing is too.. Now go back under the USELESS ROCK you came from, and we will keep ignoring you
ok , thanks so much , bubye
Posted on Great to hear from you. Our caeitrve agency Evolved Digital (www.evolveddigital.tv) know all the secrets and I am sure they'll be happy to give you some quick guidance if you need any
You probably enjoy hurting them too don't you Sam?
I think neutering animals is barbaric. You are cutting off an animals reason for living for your own convenience and amusement.
Spaying and neutering companion animals is for the benefit of the animals themselves, not for human convenience or amusement. About four million animals are euthanized in shelters every year because there simply aren't enough homes for them. This number would be dramatically decreased – if not eliminated entirely – if people responsibly spayed and neutered before their dogs or cats could contribute to the overpopulation crisis.
orrrr... maybe population control....
And why these pets usually dont stop reproducing?
because their owners let them do it.
Pets.. would be under control if the owners were responsible.. hint.. alot of them are NOT.
Actually, you know...there's nothing that amuses me more than sterilizing animals. In fact I wrote a song about it, wanna hear it? Here it goes:
She laughs about it
Shrinking infections if the wind blows just right
jacking themselves off polyester!
I wanna jump, this isn't right!
Hey, when am I getting it back?
I got my diddly spayed (x3)
I got my diddly
I got my dingaling spayed!
Seriously, go work in a kill shelter for a few months. Specifically in the euthanasia rooms, and tell me again how neutering to keep the population at a reasonable level is for our own amusement....
Not only for population control, which is a very good reason for spay/neutering, but also for their health, in both males and females. After decades of caring for many dog and cats, one thing that I have found to be true is that very often life threatening health problems arise from not spaying and nuetering, such as testicular cancer, various prostrate problems, uterus infections (which can often be a silent killer) and uterus cancer. As for PETA pressing charges, good luck to them, I completely agree with their cause, even though Sea World may be the wrong target, as they help contribute a lot to marine environment programs in Flordia and all around the world. It is long since time however that we get serious in this country about animal rights-especially in the food industry. I really wish they would go after most of these livestock businesses, which only care about making money and maximizing profit.
If cows are not only regarded as "T-bone-steak," this will have a big impact on the way we live. But it is somehow cynical to see that there are dogs and cats who are better looked after than kids and folks in some poor areas. Animal protecting agencies and WWF should bring more attention to all animals and their needs. (Artgerechte Haltung)!
There are human charities to look after humans. Animal charities need to use their funding to protect those who have no voice.
The answer is NO! Every living creature is born free.
Can animals be slaves? Yes, they can. For instance, back in the 1960's the U.S.Navy was training dolphins to kill Vietnamese during the Vietnam war. Even now, our military is traing dogs to do the same over in Afghanistan. This needs to stop simply for humanitarian purposes.
The GOP thinks/wants people(animals) to be slaves. The GOP mantra: Turn all the Old, Sick, Poor, Non-white, Non-christian, Unemployed, and Gay people into slaves. Then whip them until they are Young, Healthy, Rich, White, Christian, Employed, and Straight. Or until they are dead. Then turn them into Soylent Green to feed the military.
Sorry, but this is not the mantra of the GOP, but of the GOP*. The GOP* is the creation of others, mainly liberals, who attribute to it all the characteristics they dislike. Any resemblance of the characteristics of the real GOP to those attributed to the GOP* is mostly coincidental.
You're a terrible troll...
This really isn't a political issue. It's an issue of compassion, and for that matter, what type of species we as humans wish to be. I know plenty of animal advocates of various political persuasions. Repeat after me: animal rights are not the the same thing as tax policy, foreign policy, etc.
I think that organizations like PETA are quick to forget the importance of organizations like Sea World, zoos etc, in guaranteeing the perservation of animals. Getting kids to experience the joys of seeing animals up close gets them to care! It provides an opportunity to teach young people, not just facts about the animal, but more importantly about the importance of conservation. Then when they grow up, they care about animals, and as a result, are more likely to care about the environmental malpractices that endanger these creatures.
Yup – and if it wasn't for McDonald's and their burgers Cows would take over the world.
Everyone knows that breeding animals, mistreating them,slaughtering them just so we can eat them is best for the animals themselves as otherwise they would massively breed and starve due to lack of food. Yup – everyone knows that we do it out of kindness to other species.
I think that would be pre-cable t.v. and internet. Kids today fall in love with and care about many types of animals they've never seen in person. Years ago, zoos, aquariums, National Geographic magazine and an occasional t.v. show were the only access children had to wild animals. Nowadays, kids have channels dedicated to animals and an incredible amount of websites and videos. These have allowed both children and adults to see wild animals live in their natural habitats and come to love them and care about their well-being without cages or aquariums.
I have no problems with zoos etc keeping animals that were born in captivity or that were rehabilitated from injuries or something along those lines. I worked in a zoo during high school. I get it. However, these places need to give them a higher quality of life. Room to run/swim, proper meals and health care, etc. The whales at Sea World don't seem to have the quality of life that they should and it shows.
I think there is a big difference too between a place like the Monterey Bay Aquarium that seems truly dedicated to helping the seas (they produce a list of what fish to eat and what fish not to eat for environmental reasons, etc.) vs. SeaWorld, which is an amusement park that forces these mammals to do stupid tricks for our amusement. It is very unnatural for them.
Most animals aren't intelligent enough to have rights, but there are some that are. Orcas definitely belong on the list. They have very complicated social lives with language and a taught culture. They learn to overcome their instinct.
For GOPisGreedOverPeople, I am a registered Republican and have always been so. Don't be so bigoted as to classify me.
Though I think the "non-human persons" classification for dolphins is a fascinating idea, I don't want to stray away from the main point. No living creature deserves to be treated with inhumane and violent means. If a being is sentient, it has the right to live.
We should also create the category: people-that-are-good-on-sandwiches.
When it comes to intelligence I am reminded of an off the cuff remark my cousin once made.
He said that goldfish are the most intelligent creatures on the planet as they never created the atom bomb.
Whether or not you recognize an animals intelligence (or are arrogant enough to believe that we are the only species of animal – yes, animal – on the planet with intellegence) is irrelevant – you don't have to be intelligent to suffer.
How can we be expected to evolve into more spiritual beings if we are still abusing the other inhabitants of our planet?
Then, why not includes plants, which are also living beings. How about viruses, bacterias, germs, etc.?
Is it time for another civil war? This time between the animal advocates and the rest of us?
There need to be a few classifications to this. As much as I don't agree with a lot of PETA concepts, some animals should be treated differently than others. Farm animals for food, should be treated differently under the law than pets, and wild animals that are not commonly domesticated should be left on their own, or if the need exists, an environment as close to the wild as possible created for them. We eat farm animals, and since most of the population doesn't raise cattle, the producers need to keep costs low at the expense of "happy" animals in many cases. This can change, as there are many PETA supported farms. We keep pets as companions, and we bond with them, it's expected that we will purchase or adopt a healthy animal – or one that we will know may need special care – same statement above, this can change by knowing and supporting where your pet comes from.
Animals SHOULD be kept as slaves. That's what they're for. And food.
Agreed. I eat many burgers every day because cows taste good. You can't take that away from me.
There are those who claim that longpig tastes good – so maybe I should eat you ?
In my opinion, being a vampire, YOU are MY food......
If the animal can be considered a slave then logically the animal should also be brought up on murder charges. There are plently of laws protecting the treatment of animals. I am pretty sure the 13th Amendment was intended for all HUMANS.
Scene is very strange snake swallows girl
http://www.bestofthebestofall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=1162
Just take your time to visit Ric O'Barry's site: http://dolphinproject.org/
Kathy, the dolphin who most often played Flipper, died in O’Barry’s (trainer) arms, commiting suicide, in the 60's. It was so moving for him that he turned from hunter/ trainer to animals activist.
Thank you for this link! Fascinating stuff!
“By any means naesescry”: Brainwashing naive, idealistic youngsters to engage in criminal activity that will land them in jail while taking refuge behind a computer screen and credit for their actions. Also known as “doing a Jerry on someone”.
come my minions of dolphins, we will rise and overthrow the corrupt american government!
Before one opposes ask these three simple questions:
1. Is 'animal' pain the similar or different from 'human' pain
2. Does suffering arises from the pain?
3. Do we like suffering to be inflicted..upon oneself..and upon 'animals'.?
If it is ok for animals to suffer..it is ok for us to suffer too.
If it is not ok for us to suffer..it is not ok for 'animals' to suffer too.
All 'breathing being' avert suffering... all wants happiness.
If we deny happiness on others,
it is natural that happiness will be denied upon us!
This is irrevocable natural law.
sotafusirn August 4, 2009 too bad na from their point of view, hindi sila nahahabag o nababahala. They wouldn't say such if they were ignorant. Hindi sila manhid para maging mapangdiskrimina. If you talk to such (kind of) people, prepare yourself – baka kailanganin mong magsumbong.
THIS IS TERRIBLE. How could people think such things and put living breathing beings through such... TORTURE. Think this: how would they like it that was them??? I dont think they would. I feel very sorry for these poor animals and I hope that the criminals will be brought to justice.
Thecentrist11 you are compleatly right...Shouldnt everyone have the right to have children? Or to have something to care for and love? I think so.
Slaves?!!??!!??
WAKE UP, PEOPLE!!
Strangest way to the marriage application
http://www.bestofthebestofall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=1142
January 16, 2009 P150K?!!?!?SERIOUSLY?!!? haha. asan na yang mga kstneog yan! Ilabas na yan! Haha
Those DAMN YOGURT COMPANIES KEEPING THOSE TRILLIONS OF MICROBES ENSLAVED, cranking out waste products in vats until they get packed up in their own filth and sold to cruel humans who eat them both dead and alive!!!!!!
END YOGURT NOW!!!!!!!
Lets make this easy, shall we. The definition of Slave: slave
[sleyv] Origin: slave [sleyv] Show IPA noun, verb, slaved, slav·ing.
noun
1. a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another; a bond servant.
2. a person entirely under the domination of some influence or person: a slave to a drug.
Definition of Person:
person
[pur-suhn] Origin: per·son [pur-suhn] Show IPA noun
1. a human being, whether man, woman, or child: The table seats four persons.
2. a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing.
Animals are excluded from being a "Person", they therefore cannot be considered a Slave. EASY! Hopefully the court will sanction the idiot attorney that is wasting the courts time on this ridicules garbage.
Ignorance is never something to be proud of. Read this:
The Dreaded Comparison: Human and Animal Slavery.
ISBN-13: 978-0962449338
Do not be to hard on yourself, ignorance can be overcome with just a little bit of hard work. As for your recommended reading, not really something that grabs my interest. I see distinct difference between Humans and animals, and I believe in the cycle of life as well as the food chain. What I do NOT believe in is anthropomorphism and a misguided claim that an animal could be considered a slave. Taken even further, it is hypocrisy to claim this for some species and not all. Again, my desire, is that the courts will see the absolute waste of time and resources that this is, and sanctions the filing attorneys. Now that is something I will help fight for.
Doesn't PETA murder... I mean "euthanize" thousands of dogs a year? What an evil and worthless organization.
PeTA, which is well-known for wanting nothing less than eradication of *all* pets and companion animals, not to mention forcing a vegan diet on everyone. PeTA – their belief that animals would be "better off dead" than risk suffering at the hands of humans is truly frightening.
Next they will be coming after our pets!
See the elephant is dying and die a very sad situation
http://www.bestofthebestofall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=1163
The most powerful horror film in the history of world cinema
http://www.bestofthebestofall.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=1141
It is sad that liberals have so many people willing to fight for animals and trees, but so very few willing to fight for unborn humans. Unborn dogs, sure, but not their own species.
Conservatives have no room to manuever when it comes to inconsistency of care for degrees of life. You care far more for proto-humans than you do for the real flesh and blood variety
it is sad that so many fight for the rights of the unborn but applaud the death penalty, war, hunting, and slaughter and abuse of all of God's creation. if you want to be Pro-Life, then be it for all of creation!!! I do.
I have always felt that animals in Zoo are like slaves.It is nice that some people are taking it further to help animals using law.that is cool!!
at what level of brain development does an animal become a reflective emotional feeling thing and not an advanced biological robot responding to environmental stimulus. We're probably talking small than rats or mice, since i think those creatures might care for their young..er do they feel for their young or they simply automated to? Pain is a real motor response in a frog but is the frog feeling pain or responding to it...?
i would have to rate killer whales, dolphins, elephants, dogs, monkeys, cats, as possessing limited intelligence, feelings of care and hurt, learning ability. I hereby declare them alien beings.
Applying a human standard of feeling and suffering to animals is the epitome of liberalism gone wild. I'm sure the various companies that supply meat for the dinner tables of the world will have a thing or two to say – with lawyers to generate talking points and defenses.
So what's next...banning contact sports?
We're not applying a human standard we're applying a high-mammalian standard. Mammals are shown to have complex personalities. Use epithets, hyperbole and incongruent parallels to your hearts desire, I wouldn't expect any better. To believe captivity has no effect on semi-intelligent animals is a theory that's becoming rapidly obsolete. Pretending an animal doesn't have an instinct to roam, to explore, so you can have something to do on the annual trip to Florida is horrible.
If a company can be seen as a person and treated as such within the laws... then why not an animal? Yet I see this as being one of those slippery slope sort of cases... If these creatures are awarded this same right then whats next.. all pets must be put out side and no longer cared for by humans or forced to wear a leash since that is a form of prisonment ? Kiss that big mac goodbye since you couldnt just around killing the cows now..
The (leash) is a compassion for their protection to keep them from harm.
We (leash) our own children on walks and congested areas for the same reason.
To protect them.
Thank you,
SilverGirl7
No, as much as we want to assign animals as something more than property, animals should never be viewed legally as anything other than property. Animals do not and should not recieve rights and the same level of treatment as human beings. Animal abuse should not be tolerated and it should still be punished by criminal law, however, if you apply human rights to animals it becomes flawed. When that whale eats a fish, should it be charged with murder? When a dog uses the bathroom outside, is that indecent exposure? The answer to both questions is, of course, no. They are animals not humans and shouldn't be held to the same standard of reasoning and responsibility that humans are held to.
Keep in mind the source of this opinion piece though, PETA has a pretty god awful history of killing massive amounts of animals personally at their only animal shelter. It is bad enough that a court case was held in an attempt to make them reclassify it as a slaughter house and it had good ground to stand on. If you want to actually support an organization that legitimately fights for animals to be treated fairly and doesn't just use naked celebrities to generate profit, support the ASPCA.
As a veterinarian I work everyday to alleviate animal pain, but the basis of this law suit and its underlying intent is what bothers me. I agree that Sea World could do a better job at housing its large whales, but PETA has an agenda to stop animal ownership. Winning a case for animals on the basis of the 13th amendment would mean an end to owning cats, dogs, and horses. I am biased as this would put me out of a job, but there would be no one to care for these creatures. This case won't hold much water in court anyways because suing based on the 13th amendment is absurd. They should sue based on the various animal welfare acts that are in place if they want to get anywhere.
I'd be less concerned about dogs, cats and horses than what would happen if 13th amendment lawsuits were raised on behalf of chickens, pigs, and cattle. See what happens when there's no meat, eggs, or milk anymore.
I have never bothered to post on anything before or get involved I'n anything but as I grow older I'm finding that I'n today's instant information age opinions are important and they matter. Right or wrong or stuck I'n the middle they are the becoming the way we not only express our beliefs, but how we impact the world with change.
We argue too much for the sake of arguing. We get off track of the subject as we try to muddy the issue by branching off into a hundred different directions....non of them revenant to the original question for debate or discussion. Some of the comparisons I see here are downright laughable I'n an attempt to simply "be heard" a rock? Really?
Why do we have to complicate everything? Why do we have to destroy the question with an answer that is only mouth service to our own ignorance.
There are many animals I'n our world that are sentient and each and everyone of us knows that deep I'n our hearts.
There are many animals that are not sentient and are part of our food chain, no more no less.
For these wonderful sentient beings, whales, dolphins and primates just to name a few. I would much rather stand at a distance and view them I'n their natural environments than I'n a cage at a zoo or a show that lines the pockets of corporations while we laugh and cry at their beauty and majesty....then quietly walk away and forget them while they are lead back to their prisons untill the next show time.
It is a proven fact that certain species have complex voices, family structure, loving nurturing families, the ability to think, plan and execute group movements vital to their survival. The talk and converse with each other, not just to organize a hunt but also to warn each other of danger, they comfort and minister to their sick, they grieve and they mourn.
Do I believe that animals should have the same rights as humans where slavery is concerned? Because that is the question correct?
Yes I believe for some of our sentient creatures they are enslaved for our pleasure and they are enslaved because of their intelligence. Why else would the intelligent creatures draw our attention with such fierceness?
Eat your cheeseburger I know I will, but please consider the pain and suffering of our sentient friends, because their pain and suffering is as real as our own.
Thank you for listening,
SilverGirl7
I agree with you 100% SilverGirl7, and I am not one to post – generally because regardless of the subject, the question is always lost and reading some of the "sound-offs" gets ridiculous at times. Animals should not be used for human entertainment – period.
Thank you PugetSoundGal,
I believe there are three categories where animals are concerned. Having said that i think it's rediculas for those who just like to argue rather than approach the topic as a challenge for posstive change by assuming the solution has to be a blanket fix for every animal.
It would be entirely possible to make these distinctions and apply them.
1. Our food chain, yes we as humans eat meat (except vegetarians) and I applaud you btw. Our food chain will always be so let's not muddy things up with cows, chickens and fish. They are not sentient.
2. Pets, those deserving of our loyalty and protection (much like a family child) can be our best friends, protectors and our comfort. I've often thought we could learn so much as humans. You can beat, kick, yell at or starve your friend and one second after that severe beating call your pets name and their eyes will light up with love and adoration, there is no anger or vengeance I'n their hearts, all they know or care about is that "my friend" loves me again. I become emotionally overwhelmed when I think how much better our own lives would be if we could let our pets teach us this simple rule of life. Live, love and be happy.
3. Our sentient friends whom we share this planet with. They are capable of every thought and emotion that we posses ourselves. Do we understand their voices? Sadly that still evades us. But I promise you one thing, if we could (talk to the animals) if we could all apply a little Doolittle to our lives I think we would grow a little closer to those who are IMO close to if not our equal.
Thank you,
SilverGirl7
Hello Silver Girl 7- I up grade u to Gold Girl 10 , I totally agree with you and repeat it – the public paying to see these animals in captivity is the main culprit...Am against Attraction Parks like Sea World...
Naim a,
Thank you for your kind words you touched my heart.
Maybe someday when man is able to think beyond his own worth we might come to realize that we are not the sole inhabitants on this planet and treat all intelligent creatures with the same compassion and respect that we strive to achieve I'n our own lives.
I hope I live long enough to see that day, that awakening that will enrich all of our lives and make this planet a better place for everyone (and everything)
Thank you,
SilverGirl7
No animals are not the slaves, they must be treated as like our family members. Also the pets are very loyal for their owners.
Animal ownership? An orca whale? And that from a veterinarian? Please. Dogs, cats, and the like are domesticated animals – that's why people ADOPT them to become part of their family.
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
8MMN8= N ~MMMMMI~ .MM ?O
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM7. .~+8MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMN. ~DMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMM. ,DMMI7ZZ8DMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMM, +MM= .:=+7$ONMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMM :8M ..:+78
MMMMMMMMMO. :MM
MMMMMMMMO NN.
MMMMMMMD .OM,
MMMMMMZ 8M
MMMMMM M?
MMMMN. .MD
MMMM 7N
MMM8 M
MMM. .M?
MMM MM
MMO . .M
MM. I: +8
MZ ,N8+: N. :M
M: 8 .7MM87, ,D+ M
M M MMMMMMNZI, :M7 + M,
M 8. OMMMM~ MO~. ~ $ M,
M M+ +N .NM7. .M M,
M ,M?, :MM: ,M =8MMD+ :N, ,M
M
M .D MMMMMM$,=NM, IM
M DM. I8, .M7
M ZN$. +N? NI
MI .~=+++ .OO
MM: .+ NM
MMM DM M7
MMM~ M= IM
MMMM I$ .MMMMO$=: .MN
MMMMM: OI ,O .+7MMM$+ DM
MMMMMM ~M: ===~, =$MMN+ .. IM.
MMMMMMN, =. .8M$= .MO D .8D
MMMMMMMM .,OI 8D M. MM
MMMMMM~ M. .Z+ .M
MMMMMN. ?MI MD ZM:
MMMMMZ ?M, .IN OM+
MMMMM? MM. ,MZ NN
MMMMM: IMM: 7MD
MMMMN 7MMO, IMMN7
MMMMO IMMMO7=. .:DMMO ..
MMMMI M ,IZNMMMMMMMMMMMMO. $D.
MMMM~ ~N IM,
MMMM. IM IM~
MMMD MM ,. ZM,
MMMZ M?.NM8$?:. .NN.
MMMI Z .7MMMMMDZI=,. ?M7
GlassGiant.com
http://www.petakillsanimals.com
http://www.EmpireSportsStars.com
check it out. I'm a student trying to make a dollar. thanks.
Ultimately, it comes down to separating humans from animals. Even if a whale is a "sentient" being capable of feeling certain emotions, certain intelligent behavior, etc, it is not a human and whether or not it is enslaved, it is still an animal. Yes, animals whether as a food source, a pet, or in captivity, deserve a certain standard of treatment but to begin applying an equivalent set of rights to [certain] animals as humans would only bring about more contradictions.
If this case succeeds (which it won't,) are all animals then slaves? Do certain animals deserve more rights than others? If so, where do we draw the line? Whether or not we define animals as "slaves," I certainly will not ever back setting a precedent for liberating all animals from human captivity, nor considering them our equals. Again, yes there are definitely areas where we need to improve our treatment of them but aside from it's value in drawing attention to maltreatment of animals in general (which if great,) the lawsuit's basis in and of itself is silly.
Great way to get us talking about animal rights though, which I totally support.
Milay,
I agree with some of what you said, but not all. I applaud you tho for speaking out I'n an intelligent manner because this is how we should talk about change. With calm opinions that stay on track with the topic. This is how we begin to bring about change.
Politicians love nothing better than an arguement so heated and diverse that it keeps "any" agenda from being organized and single mindedly on track for change. This is a practice humans have used since creation to stall any submission for change. We are our own worst enemy I'n other words. They don't have to shut us down we do that quite well on our own.
The truth is we are not ready as a species to come together to accomplish great things yet. At least not on a level strong enough that it has become common practice to "seek the truth and apply it"
I hope someday we will be able to accomplish this, to set aside petty differences and bring about good posstive change I'n all our lives.
Thank you,
SilverGirl7
You are in point of fact a excellent webmaster. The web site loading pace is incredible. It sort of feels that you are doing any distinctive trick. Furthermore, The contents are masterpiece. you've done a wonderful activity on this subject!
Many thanks for this article. I'd also like to mention that it can be hard while you are in school and simply starting out to create a long credit ranking. There are many college students who are simply trying to live and have a lengthy or positive credit history can be a difficult issue to have.
[IMG]http://images.vfl.ru/ii/1353971914/cccd901a/1278392_m.jpg[/IMG]
Help support newborn Autumn through her rare heart disease.
More...http://helpplatform.chipin.com/autumns-battle
God Bless,
Alan, Lindsay, Alexis, Aiden, and Autumn Markos
They are not fish they are mamals (not that I think that should make a difference) and i'm sure it doesn't change you opinion!
No fish can't be slaves, they just "are" they "exist"
But whales and dolphins are not fish, they are mammals.
Look the word up.
You are a mammal.
I am not attacking you, just trying to open your mind a little. I do hope you will read the definition of a mammal and take the time to look at it instead of just reading the words.
Thank you,
SilverGirl7