Skip

Cetacean Community v. Bush
October 21, 2004 8:40 PM   Subscribe

Doplhins and whales have no standing to sue. This is a sad day for the cetacean community. The time for revolution is now.
posted by homunculus (12 comments total)

 
Read as : we're human. You're not. So, we don't care.
posted by troutfishing at 9:42 PM on October 21, 2004


I'll tell you about some frickin' revolution. They are 0-6. Nothing short of a revolution's gonna help 'em. Freaking Ricky Williams.
posted by xmutex at 9:48 PM on October 21, 2004


If lawmakers "intended to take the extraordinary step of authorizing animals as well as people and legal entities to sue

That's right, because taking the step of authorizing legal entities (corporations) who are by definition not people at all, to sue wasn't extraordinary at all.

Yes, yes, I get that the headline sounds like it comes straight out of The Onion, and fooled someone with it at work earlier today. Good times. But the real joke is that within a decade - just you watch - the question of dolphins' legal standing within the marine world won't seem absurd at all, though it will probably still be controversial.
posted by soyjoy at 9:51 PM on October 21, 2004


Why does the whale have to be the plaintiff? Can't anyone in CA sue anyone else who can be shown to be breaking a law? Isn't that how a lot of environmental suits are brought forward?
posted by scarabic at 9:58 PM on October 21, 2004


scarabic, possibly. But this particular hippie said I AM SUING YOU IN THE NAME OF THE WHEELS, so they giggled at him. And then he was like DAMMIT I'M SERIOUS so this happened.
posted by kavasa at 12:51 AM on October 22, 2004


Under the Medieval legal system it was possible for animals to sue, and it was possible for inanimate objects, like a bench, to sue or be sued. It was related to a system of universal laws that covered all Gods creations. It may seem rediculous to us now, but for them it was perfectly obvious, the court records are full of interesting cases.

Save Sue the Whales.
posted by stbalbach at 1:28 AM on October 22, 2004


stbalbach - thanks for that amazing bit of arcana.
posted by troutfishing at 4:54 AM on October 22, 2004


Good. Otherwise the PETAites would even now be working up lawsuits against every animal shelter, breeding farm, zoo, and circus in the country. Laugh all the way back to the Dark Ages, suckers!

But if someone has the grounds to sue on behalf of a whale, then how long before some crazy fundie motherfucker sues an abortion clinic on behalf of a fetus?
Yes, yes, slippery slope and all that, but granting full legal rights to non-human unthinking entities is a barrier we need to think about very carefully before crossing. (And no, LOL CORPORATIONS doesn't count--they are composed of and directed by thinking human beings.)
posted by darukaru at 9:23 AM on October 22, 2004


Following stbalbach's post, I remember a college class where we talked about the medieval animal laws, and even read an account of a pig's trial for going on a destructive eating rampage. I thik the pig was convicted; can't remember what the sentence was, but it probably wasn't good for the pig...
posted by COBRA! at 9:40 AM on October 22, 2004


A believe a movie was made about a similar pig, The Hour of the Pig (AKA The Advocate).
posted by homunculus at 11:35 AM on October 22, 2004


A = I
posted by homunculus at 11:39 AM on October 22, 2004




« Older A Typographer's Call To Arms   |   YAD CKOL SPAC Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post