首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Sometime soon, according to animal-right activities, a great ape will testify in an American courtroom. Speaking through a voice
Sometime soon, according to animal-right activities, a great ape will testify in an American courtroom. Speaking through a voice
admin
2010-07-19
55
问题
Sometime soon, according to animal-right activities, a great ape will testify in an American courtroom. Speaking through a voice synthesizer, or perhaps in sign language, the lucky ape will argue that it has a fundamental right to liberty. "This is going to be a very important case." Duke University law Prof. William Reppy Jr. told the New York Times.
Reppy concedes that apes can talk only at the level of a human 4-year-old, so they may not be ready to discuss abstractions like oppression and freedom. Just last month, one ape did manage to say through a synthesizer: "Please buy me a hamburger." That may not sound like crucial testimony, but lawyers think that the spectacle of an ape saying anything at all in court may change a lot of minds about the status of animals as property.
One problem is that apes probably won’t be able to convince judges that they know right from wrong, or that they intend to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Since they are not persons, they don’t even have legal standing to sue. No problem, says Steven Wise, who taught animal law for 10 years at Vermont law school and is now teaching Harvard law school’s first course in the subject. He says lawyers should be able to use slavery-era statutes that authorized legal nonpersons (slaves) to bring lawsuits. Gary Francione, who teaches animal law at Rutgers University, says that gorillas "should be declared to be persons under the constitution."
Unlike mainstream animal-welfare activists, radical animal-rights activists think that all animals are morally equal and have rights, though not necessarily the same rights as humans. So the law’s denial of rights to animals is simply a matter of bias-speciesism. It’s even an expression of bias to talk about protecting wildlife, since this assumes that human control and domination of other species is acceptable. These are surely far-out ideas. "Would even bacteria have rights?" asks one exasperated law professor, Richard Epstein of the University of Chicago Law School.
For the moment, the radicals want to confine the rights discussion to apes and chimps, mostly to avoid the obvious mockery about litigious lemmings, cockroach liberation, and the issue of whether a hyena eating an antelope is committing a rights violation that should be brought before the world court in the Hague. One wag wrote a poem containing the line, "Every beast within his paws/Will clutch an order to show cause."
The news is that law schools are increasingly involved in animal issues. Any radical notion that vastly inflates the concept of rights and requires a lot more litigation is apt to take root in the law schools. ("Some lawyers say they are in the field to advance their ideology, but some note that it is an area of legal practice that could be profitable," reports the New York Times.)
A dozen law schools now feature courses on animal law, and in some cases at least, the teaching seems to be a simple extension of radical activism. The course description of next spring’s "Animal Law Seminar" at Georgetown University Law Center, for instance, makes clear to students which opinions are the correct ones to have, It talks about the plight of "rightless plaintiffs" and promises to examine how and why laws "purporting to protect" animals have failed.
Ideas about humane treatment of animals are indeed changing. Many of us have changed our minds about furs, zoos, slaughterhouse techniques, and at least some forms of animal experimentation. The debate about greater concern for the animal world continues. But the alliance between the radicals and the lawyers means that, once again, an issue that ought to be taken to the people and resolved by democratic means will most likely be pre-empted by judges and lawyers. Steven Wise talks of using the courts to knock down the wall between humans and apes. Once apes have rights, he says, the status of other animals can be decided by other courts and other litigation.
The advantage of the litigation strategy is that there’s no need to sell radical ideas to the American people. There are almost no takers for the concept of "nonhuman personhood," the view of pets as slaves, or the notion that meat eating is part of "a specter of oppression" that equally afflicts minorities, women, and animals in America. You can supersede open debate by convincing a few judges to detect a "rights" issue that functions as a political trump card. The rhetoric is high-minded, but the strategy is to force change without gaining the consent of the public.
Converting every controversy into a "rights" issue is by now a knee-jerk response. Harvard Law Prof. Mary Ann Glendon, author of Rights Talk, writes about our legal culture’s "lost language of obligation." Instead of casting arguments in terms of human responsibility for the natural world, rights talkers automatically spin out tortured arguments about "rights" of animals and even about the "rights" of trees and mountains. This is how "rights talk" becomes a parody of itself. Let’s hope the lawyers and the law schools eventually get the joke. (853 words)
The author would agree that ______.
选项
A、it is ridiculous to think about cockroach liberation seriously
B、the law’s denial of rights to animals is a matter of bias-speciesism
C、apes can express feelings accurately through synthesizer
D、gorillas should be declared to be persons under the constitution
答案
A
解析
作者对激进的极端动物权利保护者是持反对态度的。参见文章第4、5段。B显然错误。C认为 apes可以准确地表达思想感情与文中所给信息不符。D也不正确。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/JklO777K
0
专业英语八级
相关试题推荐
Investorsseekingacheap,no-frillswaytosellprivatisationsharesneedlooknofurtherthanthepostbox.Moststockbroke
1Medicalconsumerism—likeallsortsofconsumerism,onlymoremenacingly—isdesignedtobeunsatisfying.Theprolongat
TheauthorthinksthatDanesadopta______attitudetowardstheircountry.Accordingtothepassage,Danishorderliness
WhichofthefollowingisNOTthefirm’srecruitmentrequirement?Thedetailsoftheprivateinvestigationshowthatthefirm
Alotofpeoplebelievethattelevisionhasaharmfuleffectonchildren.Afewyearsago,thesamecriticismsweremadeofthe
Rewardsandpunishmentsareusedindifferentwaysbydifferentcommunitiestomaintainsocialorderandpreserveculturalvalue
今天的老年人是昨天的劳动者。他们对物质文化的发展作出了许多贡献,理所当然应享受物质文化发展的成果。若全社会都把尊敬老人看作当代的美德,人们就会有一种安全感。这使得各个年龄层的人都感到他们将来的日子肯定也是愉快的,就会全力以赴地投入工作。去年,宣武医
DidMarcoPoloTelltheTruth?ThereisacontroversyaboutMarcoPolo’striptoChina.DidMarcoPolotellthetruth?Ifyo
DidMarcoPoloTelltheTruth?ThereisacontroversyaboutMarcoPolo’striptoChina.DidMarcoPolotellthetruth?Ifyo
A、Mexico.B、Urugray.C、China.D、Venezuela.B
随机试题
以下因素中,能够引起肝血流减少的是
A.肝B.心C.脾胃D.肺E.肾“生气之源”指的是
下列不属于不动产登记原始资料的是()。
在折射率n3=1.52的照相机镜头表面涂有一层折射率n2=1.38的MgF2增透膜,若此膜仅适用于波长为550nm的黄光,则此膜的最小厚度是()。
“让学校的一草一木,一砖一瓦都开口说话”运用的德育方式是()。
在社区的基本构成要素中,()是社区的第一要素。
为了加强对学校教育的管理,限制学生参加社会活动,把教师和学生的精力吸引到课业上来,国民政府实施的措施是()
一国行使居民税收管辖权,意味着该国只对居民来源于本国境内的所得行使征税权。()
Pentium CPU采用了很多且分布在不同的位置上的地向引脚GND和电源引脚VCC的目的是( )。
Itisstrangethatsomanyoftheimportantmeetingsinpeople’slivestakeplacequitebychance,Icouldhavesat【C1】______in
最新回复
(
0
)