You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
-Short Attention Span Theater-
Slavery protections for animals? Judge to decide
2012-02-08
The PETA people are truly nuts. I'd ask where this ends but clearly it would never end...
SAN DIEGO: A federal judge for the first time in US history heard arguments Monday in a case that could determine whether animals enjoy the same constitutional protection against slavery as human beings.

US 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, Florida.

“This case is on the next frontier of civil rights,” said PETA’s attorney Jeffrey Kerr, representing the five orcas.
This is the next frontier of Orwell's worst fears...
Sea WorldÂ’s attorney Theodore Shaw called the lawsuit a waste of the courtÂ’s time and resources. He said it defies common sense and goes against 125 years of case law applied to the ConstitutionÂ’s 13th amendment that prohibits slavery between humans.

“With all due respect, the court does not have the authority to even consider this question,” Shaw said, adding later: “Neither orcas nor any other animal were included in the ‘We the people’ ... when the Constitution was adopted.”

Miller listened to both sides for an hour before announcing that he would take the case under advisement and issue his ruling at a later date. The judge raised doubts a court can allow animals to be plaintiffs in a lawsuit, and he questioned how far the implications of a favorable ruling could reach, pointing out the militaryÂ’s use of dolphins and scientistsÂ’ experiments on whales in the wild.

Kerr acknowledged PETA faces an uphill battle but he said he was hopeful after MondayÂ’s hearing.

“This is an historic day,” Kerr said. “For the first time in our nation’s history, a federal court heard arguments as to whether living, breathing, feeling beings have rights and can be enslaved simply because they happen to not have been born human. By any definition these orcas have been enslaved here.”
While Mr. Kerr is all wound up about 'enslaving' animals, the Left has no problems with enslaving people to the will of their progressive masters.
The issue is not about whether the animals have been subjected to abuse, the defense said. If the court were to grant orcas constitutional rights, Shaw warned the ruling would have profound implications that could impact everything from the way the US government uses dogs to sniff out bombs and drugs to how zoos and aquariums operate.

“We’re talking about hell unleashed,” he said.
Posted by:Steve White

#23  The court has ruled against PETA in this case, as a sensible judiciary should.
Posted by: Scooter McGruder   2012-02-08 23:41  

#22  So what are these idiots planning to do? Set the whales free into the ocean where they will surely die?

This is the stupidest thing I heard today.
Posted by: newc   2012-02-08 18:30  

#21  Re: Animal and idol worship. Animal worship has been around for thousands of years. When animal worship/protection becomes law is when that nation has reached an all time low.
Posted by: Ebbaique Spereting5364   2012-02-08 17:37  

#20  Ants, Crazyfool. You've just bankrupted the entire Federal government (more than it already is).
Posted by: Shimble Guelph5793   2012-02-08 16:43  

#19  Good point, BP.
Posted by: phil_b   2012-02-08 16:24  

#18  For the hollywood types, if the hamster ends up in the ass, who is the -ist and who is the -ee?
Posted by: swksvolFF   2012-02-08 14:17  

#17  Passports for migrating Birds?
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2012-02-08 13:19  

#16  Does that mean we can claim our pets, rodents, and insects as dependents on our 1040? Will they be required to get Social Security numbers? Be drafted into Obama's 'civilian army'?

If you have 10 acres of land, and the estimate is about 10K insects per acre (guessing).... do you get to claim 100K dependents on your 'Earned Income Credit' form?

Lots of legal questions here...
Posted by: CrazyFool   2012-02-08 13:12  

#15  This nonsense will end when a judge disbars a lawyer for bringing such an insane case into court.

The lawyers often have to hold their noses in order to get paid well to do their job. I don't blame the lawyers, I blame the idiot(s) who accept these kinds of cases.
Posted by: gorb   2012-02-08 13:09  

#14  Oink, oink, 2x4
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2012-02-08 12:47  

#13  The purpose is not to elevate the protection for animals to the level of humans. It is to lower the protection of humans to the level of animals.

Some animals. though, will be always more equal than others.
Posted by: Twobyfour   2012-02-08 11:16  

#12  I am wondering if we can go to court to rule that the people in PETA do not have rational thought and can not be allowed in society since they are a danger to themselves and others.
Posted by: DarthVader   2012-02-08 10:40  

#11  This nonsense will end when a judge disbars a lawyer for bringing such an insane case into court. Then the next lawyers will think twice. Even if its overturned by the 9th such a ruling would humiliate the lawyer.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2012-02-08 10:14  

#10  Peta can't see past their own noses. If you want to teach a kid to treasure wildlife, the kid needs to see real animals. Pictures in a book or videos just don't have the same impact that dealing with real living creatures has. Without hands on (or at least close up) experience, young people think of wildlife in the abstract, and are less likely to care what happens in nature.

Also, without zoos, an awful lot of species go extinct. Zoos keep the gene pool fresh for some imperiled species. See, for just one example of many, the European Wiscent, or native bison, preserved for 50 years at Brookfield Zoo in the Chicago area before finally returning to the wild after the Iron Curtain crashed down.

Posted by: mom   2012-02-08 09:00  

#9  I can't believe the court actually had a hearing.

I suspect a conflict of interest. Some jackass allowed it to have standing.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2012-02-08 08:44  

#8  Depends on what you are feeding them, I suppose.

My dining room table used to be alive at one point. Was it fair to kill it and enslave its carcass to hold up my food?
Posted by: gorb   2012-02-08 08:08  

#7  I can't believe the court actually had a hearing. It should have dismissed the suit immediately and assessed court costs.

(PS - what about all the "enslaved" bacteria in my gut? They are, after all, doing my bidding.)
Posted by: Spot   2012-02-08 07:59  

#6  Gorb- rest easy, now in CA and in the 9th Circus Court one can marry the same sex horse. Next stop, I'm gonna marry my son so the Gov't can't get at me with their confiscatory inheritance tax.
Posted by: jack salami   2012-02-08 07:52  

#5  99% of human genes are already in animals.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2012-02-08 06:59  

#4  Gorb,

Could I marry one (assuming it were the opposite sex, of course)?

Do you live in 'frisco? If so, then yes and the sex wouldn't matter.
Posted by: AlanC   2012-02-08 06:51  

#3  Just wait till we start putting human genes in animals.
Posted by: phil_b   2012-02-08 04:52  

#2  Since when were animals mentioned in the Constitution? Are they equivalent to humans? Could I marry one (assuming it were the opposite sex, of course)?
Posted by: gorb   2012-02-08 01:15  

#1  Will the honorable Mr. Kerr call Mr. Ed to testify as an expert witness on animals being forced to perform? Wilbur? Wilbur?
Posted by: USN, Ret.   2012-02-08 01:01  

00:00