Seriously. Discrimination on the grounds of race, creed, sex or type is not fair..... But how far should it go? Do plants get a vote? Stones? Particles of air?
jk. but it can be funny to work some of these things out to their 'logical' conclusions...... 'discrimination is wrong' etc.
2007-10-30 03:51:42 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Apes are just as smart as democrats and should be allowed to vote do not insult the apes it is a hate crime.
2007-10-30 03:56:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Let's do flush some of these conclusions out.
Many would say we are justified in denying the franchise to apes because they lack the cognitive ability of humans, etc.
But no one would say it is acceptable to deny a person who is severely mentally retarded the right to vote merely because of his disability. This would be unfair discrimination. Therefore, cognitive function cannot serve as the proper basis for why it is tolerable to deny apes suffrage.
What is it, then? Apes do not belong in our political community. As a political community, we are comprised of human beings, not animals and plants. Though this may be anthropocentric (good vocab word), this is the way it has been all along, dating back to Genesis, the root of the Judeo-Christian values that undergird our society. Genesis legitimates anthropocentricity by teaching that God created the earth for humans.
By the way, kudos to the first guy for having the gumption to call democrats stupid and write a sentecnce infused with errors at the same time.
2007-10-30 12:27:57 · answer #2 · answered by John Tiggity 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If a sentient being can meet the requirements for citizenship -- including the legal birthright requirements and the necessary paperwork -- then they should be entitled to the benefits as well, including the right to vote.
So far -- very few apes (and almost no other species) have demonstrated sufficient language and cognitive ability to even start passing the second threshold -- most are limited to a few hundred words of vocabulary -- and test on the human IQ scale as handicapped -- below the threshold that humans with that IQ are allowed to vote.
But over time, I can easily imagine that changing -- I think that aptitude and cognitive ability -- rather than genetics -- should be the defining characteristic. But then, I oppose all unreasonable discrimination.
2007-10-30 10:56:52 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Apes, plants ,stones and particles of air aren't equal to us in any way so where is the equality and discrimination??
2007-10-30 10:59:40 · answer #4 · answered by 24Special 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If discrimination is wrong, then I guess I will have to rescind my attitude towards George W. Bush. I have been referring to him as a monkey because of the stupid looks he makes when he is doing one of his lying speeches so I suppose that is really demeaning to monkeys? I'll have to watch that in the future. Maybe I'll start referring to him as a human amoeba.
2007-10-30 11:06:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I believe we have no business in how other humans live their lives as long as it is within the bounds of the law.
Since we have no business into the personal lives of others I do not believe it to be right to deprive opportunities or liberties based upon the fact that we may not agree with who they are.
2007-10-30 11:01:26 · answer #6 · answered by smedrik 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm watching a documentary right now where earthworms are demanding the right to vote.
2007-10-30 11:12:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
sure but they have to vote for me.
2007-10-30 11:05:26 · answer #8 · answered by kp 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋