Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Progressivism

Something fishy in San Diego . . .

The latest Progressive nonsense:

In an unprecedented lawsuit, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is accusing the SeaWorld marine parks of keeping five of its star-performer killer whales in conditions that violate the 13th Amendment ban on slavery.

PETA says the suit, to be filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in San Diego, is the first federal court case seeking constitutional rights for members of an animal species.

Categories > Progressivism

Discussions - 3 Comments

California is the insane asluym and the members of PETA are the patients....

Liberalism is a......

I think PETA might want to rethink the side they are choosing to support and find a worthier animal to free. Consider what the killer whale does in the wild. "As I would not be prey, so I would not be an apex predator...."

The year of Jubilo cannot come if we support those who kill mammals in the wild over those just looking for a tasty shellfish to eat...

I thought this was largely a joke (and I still think it is) but apparently some law professors at some of our finest schools actually buy this Peter Singer-esque nonsense:

"Rutgers University law professor Gary Francione, for example, contends that animals deserve the fundamental right to not be treated as property. Law professor David Favre of Michigan State University has proposed a new legal category called "living property" as a step toward providing rights for some animals.

Favre was skeptical that litigation seeking to apply the 13th Amendment to animals would prevail.

"The court will most likely not even get to the merits of the case, and find that the plaintiffs do not have standing to file the lawsuit at all," he said by email. "I also think a court would not be predisposed to open up that box with fully unknown consequences."

Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe, who in past writings has proposed extending legal standing to chimpanzees, also expressed doubt that the courts were ready to apply the 13th Amendment to animals. But he welcomed the PETA lawsuit as a potentially valuable catalyst for "national reflection and deliberation" about humans' treatment of animals.

"People may well look back at this lawsuit and see in it a perceptive glimpse into a future of greater compassion for species other than our own," Tribe wrote in an email."

{Facepalm!}

Are these really the best minds that this country has to offer in educating future lawyers? Or, does the Constitution simply mean nothing anymore?

Save the whales, but abortion, even infanticide, or child-cide is usually morally permissible in this line of reasoning following Singer.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/17124