Don’t tell me I am an alarmist about human exceptionalism. The Swiss–who have already declared the intrinsic dignity of individual plants–are now going to vote whether to permit animals to sue in court. From the story:
Switzerland will hold a referendum next month on whether domesticated animals should have the right to be represented by lawyers in court. The country recently changed its constitution to ensure the protection of the “dignity” of plant life and passed a law last year guaranteeing rights for all creatures – from guinea pigs to goldfish. If Swiss voters approve the referendum in March, every canton in the country will be obliged to appoint a lawyer to act on behalf of pets and barnyard animals in order to protect them from abuse.
Of course, the real litigants will be animal rights activists–who put this initiative on the ballot. They will use lawsuits to oppress animal using industries by bringing cases fair and foul. As I point out in my upcoming book, A Rat is a Pig is a Dog is a Boy, gaining legal standing for animals to bring cases in court is one of the top agenda items of the animal rights movement.
We’ll see if the Swiss are really so far gone that they will allow their animal using industries to be ruined by animal rights lawyers. If the Swiss pass this nonsense, their agriculture will be turned into Swiss cheese and they will have only themselves to blame.
January 31st, 2010 | 9:35 pm
That is the most idiotic thing I’ve ever heard. Even humans aren’t allowed to bring cases to court unless at least one of the human defendants ACTUALLY BRINGS THE CASE TO COURT. But of course no animal can do this, because animals don’t sue and they don’t understand lawsuits. The personification of animals has taken a giant leap from the metaphorical to the psychotically literal.
A sane society would realize that none of this is necessary, because humans have a vested interest in a thriving, healthy ecosystem. There are real human interests at stake, and those can be taken to court; and there are also criminal laws prohibiting animal cruelty. But that is not enough for an insane society bent on bestowing liberty and rights upon the flowers in the meadow because it has forgotten that there is a difference between a man and a tadpole.
February 1st, 2010 | 2:05 am
What if a lawyer was representing an animal (lets say a horse) that was seriously injured (say twisted intestines) but the owner didn’t want to euthanize the animal.
Could the lawyer sue the owner (on behalf of the animal, of course) for the right to “assisted suicide”?
February 1st, 2010 | 8:21 am
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by LoraInMI: RT @CO2HOG: SHS Swiss to Vote on Whether to Give Animals Lawyers http://bit.ly/bVWeTD #tcot…
February 1st, 2010 | 11:08 am
I think this is a great idea! There’s such an overpopulation of lawyers that they’re going to have to expand their client base if they ever hope to recover the cost of three years of law school. Can I represent my cats?
February 1st, 2010 | 12:54 pm
I wonder if this would allow animals to sue their owners for violating their bodily rights and getting them spayed and neutered without their consent. >.>
February 1st, 2010 | 3:44 pm
[...] More. Posted in Politics | No Comments » Leave a Comment [...]
February 1st, 2010 | 6:44 pm
[...] Sound crazy? You aren’t alone. [...]
February 1st, 2010 | 7:14 pm
Even if passed, this would likely have little effect on animals. I suspect it would be abused like our class action suits, where thousands of plaintiffs get nickels and dimes while their “representation” gets millions. A lot of lawyers got rich on Microsoft’s dime that way.
All they have to do is find a group of animals being “mistreated” and claim to represent them. If it’s like our class action suits, if the plaintiff wins, the attorneys get “reasonable” fees from the losing side, providing they can document their thousands upon thousands of billable hours… *ka-ching*
February 3rd, 2010 | 8:13 am
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vince Humphreys, Michele Payn-Knoper, tamoor, GoldDogs, Mike Ver Steeg and others. Mike Ver Steeg said: RT @GoldDogs: Swiss to vote on whether to give animals lawyers http://bit.ly/bSg2IR [...]
February 3rd, 2010 | 9:24 am
why doesn’t your so-called compassion extend to animals? Why let them be slaughtered? They have a right to live too. To think otherwise is pretty arrogant and ignorant.
February 4th, 2010 | 11:21 am
Animals need the care of human beings or they wouldn’t survive. The elimination of domestic animals is exactly what the animal rights zealots want. Taking property rights away from humans means that humans will no longer be able to care for their animals. This is exactly what this law intends. HSUS and the animal rights people will take your animals and kill them.
February 8th, 2010 | 4:12 am
[...] is voting on whether animals should get legal [...]
March 3rd, 2010 | 11:05 am
[...] have a piece in today’s NRO that tees off on Switzerland’s upcoming vote to give animals a legal right to a lawyer in abuse cases. But as I point out in A Rat is a Pig,etc., granting animals standing may be the most desired [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact