Orangutan granted "human rights"

In Argentina:  article

snippet:

 
In a landmark ruling that could pave the way for more lawsuits, the Association of Officials and Lawyers for Animal Rights (AFADA) argued the ape had sufficient cognitive functions and should not be treated as an object.
 
The lawyers said that while Sandra was not identical to humans biologically, she was in fact like humans emotionally, and would be happier living in a semi-wild habitat.

Click to expand...

I find it interesting that they argued on the basis of emotions rather than more cognitive mental and social functions such as morals and ethics.  If emotions alone are the basis of freedom, then all animals should have the "human right" to freedom.  This is, of course, the ground work that some of the more extreme groups are looking for.  To me, it seems to be the first very small step in a war against zoos and other preservation facilities.

Taken to it's most extreme there would be no more pets.  There could be no pets because that would constitute 'ownership or slavery'.  The most extreme elements of the animal rights movement have been laying the ground work for a possible ruling against humans having pets.

Hmmmm.... mixed feelings about this. While, I agree that animals shouldn't be treated the same as objects I don't think they should be treated as humans either. They aren't by very definition, they are animals and it is to their detriment to treat them otherwise. As a vegan and animal activist I know well meaning people who try to treat their animals like people instead of respecting the species that they are. This has lead to errors in animal husbandry. For example, one such person I know has the theory that "If I wouldn't eat it, my animals shouldn't eat it." Well, I wouldn't eat bones or deer antlers but they are good for my dogs teeth. She also thinks "if I wouldn't like something, my animals wouldn't." Not that she has pigs, but as an example I wouldn't like rolling in mud but pigs need to or their skin will be sun burned. Anyway, you get my point probably.

Just saw this thread & it is interesting.  I don't think animals that are like us should be given special status. All lives are important.  With pets, we have made them dependent on us & they would be in danger without our care.  I think of my animals as family but also respect their choices as much as possible.  I called my cat "my baby" but never thought of him this way.  He was a sentient being and had separate needs & wants due to this catness.  I never treated his needs as less than mine.  I think the main thing I am trying to say is that animals are not in any way lower than humans.  Some people think that they were put on the earth for our needs & that they are "just animals".  People build their houses in the woods & then complain about raccoons.  They kill them because they are "inconvenient".  Think about how inconvenient we are to wildlife.