Not your grandma’s humane society;
Animal Justice’s non-profit wing launched their charter campaign last week, saying it would “ensure animals are treated as sentient beings instead of mere property, would guarantee the rights and freedoms that make life worth living, and give all animals a chance to have their interests represented in court.”
The group says there’s a gap between how Canadians care about animal welfare and how the legal system views it, and are hoping a petition draws the attention of policymakers.
“Animals don’t have legal standing to go to court and have a judge say yeah, that animal’s rights are being violated, that to me that is very sad,” said Camille Labchuk, a lawyer with Animal Justice.
Pollspotting! Does Canada need a charter of rights for animals? (To nullify the vote-splitting design of this poll, I suggest the nays be direct at the “No” option.)
10:50am update: SDA gets results! “No” has pulled into the lead.
h/t Harold
The third (weasley) question in the poll is designed to skim off mushy votes to ensure a yes vote. If one voted no it does not negate the intent of the third question. F…..g CBC!
Actually, no. Think about this. People that aren’t activists or hard core vegans only are thinking of their pet cats or dogs. Possibly horses or other such cute animals. The activists by putting this out there are thinking long term. If they actually succeed then they will be targeting industrial farms and eventually organic farms. This would be used to force veganism on everyone or at least ensure the costs of meat protein would go through the roof so only the rich gulfstream environmentalists could afford the indulgences to indulge.
there should have been a question to the effect of the sanity of these fools.
I’m assuming then that if you have a bacterial infection the court has to decide whether or not you can use antibiotics. Of course, by the time the court decides you may well be dead, especially if each bacterium has its own publicly funded lawyer.
On the bright side weasels ought to be able to sue lawyers in a passing off case
OT but from that CBC thread:
Question authority? Not if you are black in America. Neil Mcdonald
…or a CBC employee in Canada.
And what about vegetable rights ? And hair ? Does it deserve to be cut as it yearns for fulfillment ?
I wonder how that baby seal feels about being exploited as a photo op?
Will the cow please take the stand and raise your right hoof
Whenever you see the word “justice” used with a qualifier affixed to it you know you are confronted with another deconstructive Marxist cultural agenda. The objective reality of the matter is the lofty idealism in the word-play masks some vile criminal agenda by special interests or the state, and in most cases injustice is the end product of prog-left justice.
In this instance the attempt to bring animals (which cannot be bound by the legal duties and responsibilities of a natural person capable of empathy, remorse and a sense of right and wrong) as legal equals diminishes the capacity of the natural person. It is a cynical move to undermine common law property rights, criminal law principles and inject state coersion further into our private lives. There have been animal cruelty laws in legal code which recognize an animals right not to be abused or subject to cruelty for hundreds of years. The status of animals as court wards is established, why the drive to undermine the basic concepts of natural/common law? Well, obviously commie activists never sleep as long as there is true justice to undermine.
From a purely ideological/philosophical perspective it is a glaring hypocrisy to advocate for the legal “personhood” of animals and not those of an unborn human being. In this form of Prog “justice” helpless humans can legally have their skulls crushed and be butchered with state sanction while animals (incapable of a sense of justice) are protected as state wards. To say this is deeply perverse and morally obtuse is being too charitable.
“Will the cow please take the stand and raise your right hoof”
The humor in this insanity is lost on the 40% who polled in favor of this – calling them (prog-left) zombies is too charitable and humor (as well as reason) is wasted on them.
Think of the cost involved in translating the barnyard languages in court…
a new day and a new insanity.
“Whenever you see the word “justice” used with a qualifier affixed to it you know you are confronted with another deconstructive Marxist cultural agenda.”
Exactly. Cultural Marxists have gone a long way toward their goal of destroying the traditional family and any morality in this country and in other western countries. What is evil is now good.
And as PaladinPhil says, the long range plan is to force us all into being vegan.
“Animals don’t have legal standing to go to court(…)”
I’m certain that the millions of llamas and armadillos that have been turned away from the courts, horrified to see their complaints gone unheard, will be tweeting about this today.
It is pretty obvious that too many people are graduating with law degrees and have no REAL work and so they go about inventing new ways they can get their hands into the pockets of consumers and in this case, almost certainly into the pockets of all taxpayers.
As is often the case, lawyers are approaching this “problem” from the most complex and disruptive angle. This is yet another appeal to fairness; why do some have more rights than others? A clear-eyed and pragmatic look at the “problem” of differing degrees of rights, suggests a far simpler solution. Rather than elevate the rights of animals, reduce the level of rights for lawyers, vegans and any of their supporters to the level animals currently enjoy.
Animals are property. The main tenet of communism/socialism is eradication of private property rights.
and yes this affects livestock owners in a profoundly detrimental way, as some practices in farming look to those who dont do it as cruel.(picking up a down cow by skidloader. How else do you pick up a 1ton animal? & if you dont they will die a horrible death by muscle deterioration and organ failure.)
These animals would not exist in these #s without the care and expense of their OWNERS.
I would love to represent seals against polar bears.
It would be great fun to watch (from behind armoured glass) a lawyer questioning a polar bear on a witness stand.
You are so right!
If these zealots are successful, hunting will be first on the list to be eliminated, with the help of the SCC.
so how does it work for class action suits, say petrocks v. mining co’s. just wondrin..
I would love to see the bats, raptors, and migratory birds represented against the wind farm operators and those new solar farm megaplexes that roast birds on the wing, WOW break out the popcorn!
If animals are given human rights there would be a heck of a lot of murder charges laid against the cats in my neighborhood alone. Lawyers for mice, voles, squirrels, chip monks and birds would tie up the courts for years. How would jury selection be approached?
Would ‘Duty of Care’ be applied to animals that abandon their young?
I don’t think those behind this idea have thought it all the way through and are guilty of Excessive use of Farce.
with the right to be searched at the border, hopefully this can bring an end to illegal migration. also been hoping for a remedy to the trespassing skunk under my step but he’d probably be deemed a squatter…