From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Sun Apr 28 2002 - 15:03:39 MDT
Hal Finney wrote:
> IMO animal rights are often taken to extremes, but in the case of chimps I
> think they make some good points. If we're going to support animal rights,
> it makes sense to be selective and to look at intelligence and brain size.
> Chimpanzees and some of the other apes are close enough to humans that
> they should be the first candidates for legal rights.
>
> Unfortunately I think we also have to look at the costs involved as well.
> Someday, when we are wealthier as a culture, it may be possible to
> protect the rights of all animals. Now, though, it is not feasible to
> grant rights to food animals or other species which would impose large
> economic costs. Even in the case of chimps, since they cannot give
> informed consent to medical experiments, it means that humans would have
> to be used at an earlier stage, imposing costs on them because of less
> thorough testing.
>
Rights are not negated on the basis of cost.
If chimp rights of some kind are reasonable, and I believe they are,
then the cost is not relevant. I cannot say we should not support
something I otherwise believe in simply because it is not convenient.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:41 MST