Title of the article: When Human Rights Extend to Nonhumans
Source: The New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/weekinreview/13mcneil.html?pagewanted=1
Garcia Fernandez, Gabriela.
The environment committee of the Spanish Parliament is discussing a new bill which aims to grant limited rights to apes, since they are considered our biological relatives. The discussio
n is based on The Great Ape Project, which takes into account apes’ human qualities such as to feel fear and happiness, create tools, use language, remember the past and plan the future. The directors of the project are the Princeton ethicist, Peter Singer and the Italian philosopher, Paola Cavalieri, for whom apes are part of a community of equals with humans. If the bill is passed, it would become illegal in Spain to kill apes and torture them, and arbitrary imprisonment would been forbidden. Apes in Spain zoos would not be freed but they would receive better care.
The big question under this project arises when deciding which humans’ rights an ape should be offered. To answer this, Mr. Singer explained that the DNA of a chimpanzee is 95% to 98.7 the same as that of humans. And he demanded in his project only rights that he felt all humans were usually offered, like freedom from torture. Under this project’s point of view, Apes’ status would be akin to that of children.
Lots of debates arise after this project was presented in the Spanish Parliament. While people who protect animals feel that “it is a great start to breaking down the species barrier”, scientists would like to keep using chimpanzees to study AIDS virus. On the other hand, Spanish Catholic bishops attacked the vote as undermining a divine will that placed humans above animals.
The article’s author states his point of view discussing what he considers the basic human right: not to be killed for food. Cannibalism is forbidden to laws of all countries. If we take into account the slide difference between a chimpanzee’s DNA and our, killing them for food as it occurs in Africa, for example, would be a crime, even without The Great Ape Project coming into force.
To conclude, all this matter can simply be seen as all great struggles separating man from beast. In the end, we have to consider that animals cannot protect themselves against humans and that’s what enables us with such superiority over them. That we reconsider our position over animals and that we treat them as equals will remain in my opinion, as something remote, even if the Ape Project is voted by the Spanish Parliament.
Source: The New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/weekinreview/13mcneil.html?pagewanted=1
Garcia Fernandez, Gabriela.
The environment committee of the Spanish Parliament is discussing a new bill which aims to grant limited rights to apes, since they are considered our biological relatives. The discussio
n is based on The Great Ape Project, which takes into account apes’ human qualities such as to feel fear and happiness, create tools, use language, remember the past and plan the future. The directors of the project are the Princeton ethicist, Peter Singer and the Italian philosopher, Paola Cavalieri, for whom apes are part of a community of equals with humans. If the bill is passed, it would become illegal in Spain to kill apes and torture them, and arbitrary imprisonment would been forbidden. Apes in Spain zoos would not be freed but they would receive better care.The big question under this project arises when deciding which humans’ rights an ape should be offered. To answer this, Mr. Singer explained that the DNA of a chimpanzee is 95% to 98.7 the same as that of humans. And he demanded in his project only rights that he felt all humans were usually offered, like freedom from torture. Under this project’s point of view, Apes’ status would be akin to that of children.
Lots of debates arise after this project was presented in the Spanish Parliament. While people who protect animals feel that “it is a great start to breaking down the species barrier”, scientists would like to keep using chimpanzees to study AIDS virus. On the other hand, Spanish Catholic bishops attacked the vote as undermining a divine will that placed humans above animals.
The article’s author states his point of view discussing what he considers the basic human right: not to be killed for food. Cannibalism is forbidden to laws of all countries. If we take into account the slide difference between a chimpanzee’s DNA and our, killing them for food as it occurs in Africa, for example, would be a crime, even without The Great Ape Project coming into force.
To conclude, all this matter can simply be seen as all great struggles separating man from beast. In the end, we have to consider that animals cannot protect themselves against humans and that’s what enables us with such superiority over them. That we reconsider our position over animals and that we treat them as equals will remain in my opinion, as something remote, even if the Ape Project is voted by the Spanish Parliament.
No comments:
Post a Comment