Visit Your Local PBS Station PBS Home PBS Home Programs A-Z TV Schedules Watch Video Donate Shop PBS Search PBS
Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly -- An online companion to the weekly television news program
Keyword Search
Topic Index Stories by Week
Home
Current Stories
Headlines
Election Coverage
Calendar
TV Schedule
Newsletter
Subscribe or unsubscribe to the E-mail Newsletter, or edit your preferences.
The Series
For Teachers
Resources
Feedback

COVER STORY:
Animal Rights
August 29, 2003    Episode no. 652
Read stories by week: 
Go
Two primates
Video - Watch this story
Requires Real Player
MARY ALICE WILLIAMS, guest anchor: Genetics have proven what science already knew. Our cousins are monkeys. More specifically, the DNA differences between man and ape are infinitesimal. Now, there's a movement to extend to apes the equal rights we enjoy. Crackpot, you say? Well, those who espouse it do emanate from California. But, as Saul Gonzalez reports, the issue has significant legal, scientific, and even religious ramifications.

SAUL GONZALEZ: Human beings -- many of us believe our intellect and reason put us head and shoulders above the rest of the animal kingdom.

However, do people too often exaggerate their distinctiveness? Especially when we compare ourselves to our closest evolutionary kin -- the great apes. They are primates like chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans, which according to recent genetic studies, share between 97 and 99 percent of their DNA with human beings.

Dr. Craig Stanford Dr. CRAIG STANFORD (Chair, Anthropology Department, University of Southern California): We are great apes and they are us. There is enough of them in us and enough of us in them that you would not draw this bold line.

GONZALEZ: Craig Stanford, chair of the anthropology department at the University of Southern California, is one of the country's leading experts on great ape behavior. He says his African field research with chimpanzee and gorilla communities has convinced him of the close parallels between great ape and human societies.

A case in point, how leaders climb to the top.

Dr. STANFORD: Male chimps rise through the dominance hierarchy not by being big, not by being strong, but by being clever, by knowing who to network with, by knowing whose favor to curry. And in that way, of course, they are strikingly reminiscent of what people do. We look at people in Congress. You don't have to be 6'5 to be a successful politician. You just need to be socially, politically really shrewd. And it is exactly the same for chimps and also for other great apes.

GONZALEZ: In anthropology circles, Stanford is best known for his assertion that great apes are so smart, that there's virtually no difference between them and young human children.

Child and primate Dr. STANFORD: The fact is that if you compared a human child, a one-and-a-half or two or two-and-a-half year old child with an adult chimp, what you'd find is that in many ways -- neurologically, intellectually, emotionally, cognitively -- they are very similar. In some ways, the chimp is dramatically smarter. It can navigate its way through a very complicated rainforest. If you put the two, a child and a chimp, on the same psychological battery of tests in the laboratory somewhere, you would find some very striking similarities.

GONZALEZ: In fact so much so, that a community of animal welfare activists, scientists, and legal scholars are championing a provocative idea on behalf of the great apes. Their argument is this one. If primates, like chimpanzees and gorillas, have so much in common with people, biologically, intellectually, and emotionally, then humanity has a moral duty -- it must surrender its monopoly on some human rights and freedoms and begin offering them to the great apes.

Dr. STANFORD: I feel that we can't ethically in good conscience do the things to them that we do to them, and continue to call ourselves modern open-minded, caring people. I think the goal right now for great apes is to raise their status to the absolute highest level.

Primate GONZALEZ: Animal rights activists say that means extending to great apes the right to life, protection of individual liberty, and the prohibition of torture. Translating such principles into laws could mean banning all medical testing involving great apes, prohibiting the economic exploitation of the animals in movies, advertising, and circuses and even stopping -- or at least vastly improving -- the keeping of great apes in zoos.

In the legal arena, some activists even envision the day when great apes, acting through human guardians, will be able to seek justice in court when their rights are violated.

Dr. STANFORD: There are legal scholars who have advocated applying anti-slavery laws to the great apes. So, you have people out there in society who are thinking in very human terms about these non-human animals.

Continue to top of next colum
Tools:
E-Mail this article
Resources
GONZALEZ: These possibilities were explored last September at Harvard University when prominent scientists, animal rights activists, and legal experts gathered to discuss extending rights to great apes.

Attorney and author Steven Wise is considered one of the fathers of the primate rights movement.

Steven Wise STEVEN WISE: Liberty and equality are two overwhelming, overweening, and overarching values in our legal systems and we should apply them to search for legal rights for chimpanzees.

GONZALEZ: But Wise acknowledges that religious ideals in our laws and society make the notion of rights for great apes ludicrous to many people.

Mr. WISE: The whole idea of dominion, that God made us superior to non-human animals, is one that is certainly deeply embedded in our religious ideas and our cultural ideas, and it would be utterly shocking if these ideas were not embedded in our laws, and, indeed, it is deeply embedded in our laws.

GONZALEZ: However, some scholars oppose sharing human rights with great apes for secular, philosophical reasons.

Dr. Tibor Machan Dr. TIBOR MACHAN (Professor of Ethics, Southern California's Chapman University): We are animals, but we are the kind of animals with culture, with the capacity for civilization, which we do not share with other animals!

GONZALEZ: Tibor Machan, a professor of ethics at Southern California's Chapman University, is writing a critical study of the animal rights movement. He says despite some behavioral and biological similarities, a moral chasm still separates human beings and great apes.

Dr. MACHAN: Human beings are unique in this moral dimension, they can do right and wrong. I don't know of any other species living where this kind of vocabulary of blames, of praise, of responsibility of guilt and of rights is appropriate.

GONZALEZ: And because, he says, they lack a sense of human right and wrong, Machan is especially appalled by the idea of giving legal standing to great apes.

Dr. MACHAN: The problems are that rights usually have something to do with them being violated. And the law usually tries to prevent that or if it can't prevent it, punish the violator. This does not make sense with animals. You do not punish an animal for, say, devouring another animal. It would be idiotic to suggest that they ought to be taken to court. That used to be done in the Middle Ages, by the way, animals were sued, and it was a circus!

Books on primates GONZALEZ: However, the bitterest clashes in the debate over whether to extend human rights to primates involves the ethics of using the animals in scientific research.

Machan favors such research if it benefits human beings and avoids needless cruelty.

Dr. MACHAN: The limit is wanton hurt, where there is no higher purpose served by it. Now, if an animal is mistreated in a laboratory experiment, which is supposedly aimed at solving a problem like curing AIDS or something, then there is nothing wrong with that.

Dr. STANFORD: What I have a terrible problem with is that we use animals who are so much like us, psychologically and emotionally, and I am talking about great apes in particular -- using them in experiments that we would never consider doing, except in the worst holocaust scenarios, on ourselves. And that, to me, makes absolutely no rational or ethical sense.

GONZALEZ: However, the greatest threat to the world's great apes isn't their treatment in labs and zoos, it's extinction in the wild. From sub-Saharan Africa to Indonesia, the animals' survival is at stake as humans encroach on their habitats.

Here are our very closest kin, and we, in our generation today, are watching them disappear. They are so much like us, that to let them just slip away is just the ultimate sin for the human species.

GONZALEZ: Great ape advocates favor lobbying the United Nations to step in, and administer these threatened habitats for the benefit of primates, not people.

For RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY, I'm Saul Gonzalez in Los Angeles.

Did you like this story? How can we improve our program or Web site?
Resources






TOP