I have been warning for years now that the animal rights movement is seeking to create moral and legal equality between humans and animals. One tactic is to have courts permit animals to become litigants in court, with animal liberationists as their guardians ad litem. In other words, the animal would be treated the same as an incompetent person or a child for purposes of the legal proceeding.
I mention this in my speeches and people laugh. I understand why: It seems ludicrous. People just do not get how serious and committed liberationists are to the cause of human/animal equality. And they underestimate the willingness of the intellectual class to dismantle venerable principles and moral values.
The audience laughter is way of saying: “Oh, that is just too dumb. It will never happen.” But people should not be so sanguine. A chimp was permitted to get an injunction in his own name in Brazil. Spain is pondering giving primates the rights of persons. New Zealand already has signed on to much of the Great Ape Project, which advocates that great apes be granted what are today called human rights.
People need to be aware that the old rules and moral standards that they take for granted–which are all based in the principle of human exceptionalism–are under intense and sustained ideological assault on several fronts, one of which is animal rights/liberation. The time has come for the laughter to stop and the defense of the unique importance of merely being human to begin.
Potential case in point: This story out of Texas seems to be reporting that animal liberationists are attempting to have primates named as litigants in a lawsuit over the suitability of a primate sanctuary. If so, it must not be permitted. Animals are not persons and should not be allowed to bring lawsuits in their own names. If the sanctuary is not up to par, that is for humans to hash out as a manner of protecting animal welfare.
I will keep an eye on this and try to find out the exact nature of the proposed litigation.