If Bonobos and Chimps were accepted into to the human branch and granted perosnhood, what effect on the world, do think would happen,
2006-11-11
10:28:46
·
10 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Science & Mathematics
➔ Zoology
All great apes (excluding gorillas), dolphins, Elephants have passed the test of conciousness, which is where they aply a dot of a diiferent color to their cheek or another part of their body, and then put them in front of a mirror, and see how they react. Passing is where thery touch and investigate the part of the body where it was put. I must note pigeons seem to hav passed the test, but it might of been because they have been trained...
2006-11-11
10:37:54 ·
update #1
Nothing. Except the people who don't want to accept that we are animals in the first place would probably even get madder.
But since when does taxonomy have any effect on anything? It's just our attempt to organize the current life as we see it.
2006-11-11 14:52:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Strix 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
I supported capital punishment for a lengthy time period, yet I have replaced my stance over the years, for quite a few motives: a million. by far the most compelling is this: now and again the legal device receives it incorrect. contained in the most suitable 30 years, over 100 people were released from lack of existence row after years of imprisonment because they were exonerated by DNA information. regrettably, DNA information isn't accessible mostly. no count number how uncommon that is, the authorities could not probability executing one unmarried innocuous human being. extremely, which could be reason sufficient for most individuals. in case you want extra, study on: 2. because of the further rate of prosecuting a DP case and the appeals procedure (it really is necessary - see reason #a million), it expenditures taxpayers a lot extra to execute prisoners than to imprison them for existence. 3. The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime prices are honestly larger in lack of existence penalty states. this may look counterintuitive, and there are diverse theories about why that is (Ted Bundy said it as a mission, so he chosen Florida – the most lively execution state on the time – to finish his very last homicide spree). in my opinion, i imagine it has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand adverse to homicide…by killing people. the authorities turns into the undesirable make sure who says, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’ 4. There’s also an argument to be made that lack of existence is too solid for the worst of our criminals. enable them awaken and flow to mattress daily of their lives in a reformatory cellular, and picture about the liberty they DON’T have, until eventually they rot of previous age. even as Ted Bundy replaced into ultimately arrested in 1978, he informed the police officer, “I favor you had killed me.” 5. maximum governments are meant to be secular, yet if you invoke Christian regulation in this debate, you'll locate arguments both for AND adverse to the shortcoming of existence penalty contained in the Bible. as an example, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not beget violence. James 4:12 says that God is the purely one which could take a existence contained in the call of justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns adverse to vengeance (which, extremely, is what the shortcoming of existence penalty quantities to). In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "enable he who's without sin solid the first stone."
2016-11-29 01:11:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Human is an adjective, not a noun, if apes could be human, they would be, but then again many types of sapiens are not at all human, what should we do? Reclassify people like Rumsfeld and Bush? To which order?
2006-11-11 10:38:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
It would bring a whole new meaning to the phrase, "A monkey could do this job!"
2006-11-11 10:36:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by spunk113 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
The line at the welfare office would get much longer.
2006-11-11 13:33:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
They would be afforded more protection under law, but no representation, if that is what you mean.
2006-11-11 13:13:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
How would they ever know? That to me is the test of conciousness, and they would fail it.
2006-11-11 10:33:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
We'd probably elect one for president. Gotta be better than the toad we have now.
2006-11-12 01:46:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
have you seen government lately? not much would really happen.
2006-11-11 10:37:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Hunting would be banned.........
2006-11-11 10:32:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by pikeruss 4
·
0⤊
0⤋