Now here's a good one.
This article fascinates me. What DOES make a "person" under law? In our country, who's animal cruelty laws are woeful at best (slap on the wrist sentences for all but the most horrid offenders), you can bequeath amounts of money to a friggin cat in a will. Does this make the cat a "person" under law. I don't think so here, because when I think about it, isn't the money just earmarked for the care of the animal?
But in the above article, the intentions are far more noble. I can see why the legal system is handcuffed here. Where DO you draw the line for personhood. The article is clear here that they are not talking about "Human", this is about "Person". Most people with pets refer to them as children, so the line may not be as legally distinct as we think. It's at least an interesting line of thought.
V
But in the above article, the intentions are far more noble. I can see why the legal system is handcuffed here. Where DO you draw the line for personhood. The article is clear here that they are not talking about "Human", this is about "Person". Most people with pets refer to them as children, so the line may not be as legally distinct as we think. It's at least an interesting line of thought.
V
posted by Voodoo at 8:32 AM
1 Comments:
I need to think about this a little more, but I note the absense of the option to find these animals a home in a zoo. Not sure why the legal machinations about person or non person. Whales washed up on a shore somewhere wind up in zoo's and similar places, without the legal wrangling of guardianship.
Post a Comment
<< Home