Rating: 
Summary: The anachronism of all nonhuman animals as legal things
Review: "Jerom died on February 13, 1996, 10 days shy of his fourteenth birthday. The teenager was dull, bloated, depressed, sapped, anemic, and plagued by diarrhea. He had not played in fresh air for eleven years. As a thirty-month-old infant, he had been intentionally infected with HIV virus SF2. At the age of four, he had been infected with another HIV strain, LAV-1. A month short of five, he was infected with yet a third strain, NDK. Throughout the Iran-Contra hearings, almost to the brink of the Gulf War, he sat in the small, windowless, cinderblock Infectious Disease Building. Then he was moved a short distance to a large windowless grey concrete box, one of eleven bleak steel and concrete cells, 9 feet by 11 feet by 8.5 feet. Throughout the war and into Bill Clinton's campaign for a second term, he languished there. This was the Chimpanzee Infectious Disease Building. It stood in the Yerkes Regional Primate Research Center near grassy tree-lined Emory University, minutes from the bustle of downtown Atlanta, Georgia. Entrance to the chimpanzee cell room was through a tiny, cramped, dirty anteroom bursting with supplies from ceiling to floor. Inside, five cells lined the left wall of the cell room, six lined the right. The front and ceiling of each cell were a checkerboard of steel bars, criss-crossed in three-inch squares. The rear wall was the same grey concrete. A sliding door was set into the eight-inch-thick concrete side walls. Each door was punctured by a one-half-inch hole through which a chimpanzee could catch glimpses of his neighbors. Each cell was flushed by a red rubber fire hose twice a day and was regularly scrubbed with deck brushes and disinfected with chemicals. Incandescent bulbs hanging from the dropped ceiling provided the only light. Sometimes the cold overstrained the box's inadequate heating units and the temperature would drop below 50 degrees F. Though Jerom lived alone in his cell for the last four months of his life, others were nearby. Twelve other chimpanzees - Buster, Manuel, Arctica, Betsie, Joye, Sara, Nathan, Marc, Jonah, Roberta, Hallie, and Tika - filled the bleak cells, living in twos and threes, each with access to two of the cells. But no one had any regular sense of changes in weather or the turn of the seasons. None of them knew whether it was day or night. Each slowly rotted in that humid sunless gray concrete box. Nearly all had been intentionally infected with HIV. Just five months before Jerom died of AIDS born of an amalgam of two of the three HIV strains injected into his blood, Nathan was injected with 40 ml of Jerom's HIV-infested blood. His level of CD4 cells, the white blood cells that HIV destroys, has plummeted. He will probably sicken and die." This is how I began RATTLING THE CAGE. It a true story. Everything done to Jerom and his cellmates was perfectly legal. But chimpanzees and bonobos are conscious and probably self-conscious. They feel pain and suffer. They solve problems insightfully. They understand cause and effect. They use tools. They make tools. They imitate, cooperate, and flourish in a rough and tumble society so political and devious that it is routinely dubbed "Machiavellian." They live in diverse cultures. Given appropriate opportunity and motivation, they can teach, deceive, self-medicate, empathize, know the minds of others, communicate symbolically, and even use language and simple mathematics. Jerom could be exploited and killed because he was a "legal thing," invisible to the civil law. His "legal thinghood" has become an anachronism, a left-over from an earlier age in which we thought that we could exploit the environment and enslave any nonhuman animal and human being that we could catch. I argue that our law must be changed. The legal personhood that protects our bodies, our lives, and our personalities from the predations of our fellow human beings must be extended to such animals as Jerom. For those who believe, as I do, that our basic law must be just and conform to our most cherished values and principles, for those who believe that might does NOT make right, in RATTLING THE CAGE I explain how that can be done.
Rating: 
Summary: Everyone should read this book.
Review: A must read for anyone who has an interest in justice, human and nonhuman animal psychology, jurisprudence, or simply cares about animals. This book intellectualizes what many know in their heart: that the way the law treats nonhuman animals is illogical, anachronistic (not to mention shameful), and ripe for change. Moreover, it does so in an articulate, humorous, and extremely readable way.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointingly narrow
Review: After reading the reviews here, I expected Rattling the Cage to be a thorough discussion of legal grounds for animal rights. Instead, I found the main theme of the book to be the evils of the Judeo-Christian tradition. If we are to believe Wise, that tradition consists largely of the systematic and unmitigated derogation of non-human animals. Has Wise never heard of the concept of stewardship? The Catholic church in particular has a large movement of environmentalists and animal advocates who explicitly promote vegetarianism and eschew animal cruelty (fur, vivisection, etc.) If Wise spent more time looking at current religious practice than at St. Augustine, he might find that his argument is considerably weakened. The Judeo-Christian tradition currently manifests itself in many ways. Some of these ways are entirely sympathetic to Wise's larger goals. Given that, how can the Judeo-Christian tradition be the exclusive culprit? In addition, Wise's book contains serious logical flaws. To mention only one here: Wise criticizes as unfounded the assumption that human and non-human animals are different in important ways. Yet he also posits (on p. 5) that we must draw some sort of line between humans and some non-human animals (e.g., insects). Why? If the human/non-human divide is arbitrarily imposed, then why is it not so that *any* division among animals is arbitrarily imposed? Nowhere in the book did I find a satisfying answer to that question. Finally, as someone who teaches about human rights, I think Wise needs to do a little more homework before announcing that human rights derive from autonomy (p. 244), even in the Western conception. Most Western thinkers agree that human rights derive from *humanity* which is defined in various ways (including, but not limited to, autonomy).
Rating:
Summary: A step in the right direction
Review: For as long as anyone can remember animals have been property of humans. Opinions differ as to why, ranging from god given rights of dominion, to levels of moral considerability, but the end result is generally the same, humans can own animals, and use them for any of a variety of purposes; no question. An animal, despite being a sentient being, in our current American legal system has no more rights to protect it from enslavement or bodily harm than say, a toaster, or a rock. Today we are learning more and more about our human place in the world, and in this investigation many are beginning to question our role as caretakers or rulers of other beings. Steven Wise is one such person. He questions the right of humans to deny sentient creatures legal personhood. What is it about humans, other than tradition and precedent, that fosters the continued enslavement and cruel treatment of nonhuman animals? In this book he focuses particularly on chimpanzees and bonobos, who are humans closest genetic relatives. Wise refers to a wide variety of philosophers, scientific findings, and legal precedents to make this book a compelling testament towards the legal personhood of nonhuman animals.
Wise begins this book by telling the story of Jerom, a chimpanzee who lived and died at the Yerkes Regional Primate Research Center. Jerom was intentionally infected with several strains of HIV over his time at the center. When Jerom was near death another chimpanzee, Nathan, was injected with Jerom's blood, which will likely (if it has not already happened) cause his death as well. Wise dedicated this book to Jerom, writing on the dedication page: For Jerom, a person, not a thing.
He continues on to write about a legal wall that exists in our society. It has been standing since the dawn of human laws, separating us humans from everything nonhuman, denying legal rights to anything not on our side of the wall. It is the goal of people like Wise and others of similar philosophies to demolish this wall and grant legal considerability to those nonhuman creatures deserving of such respect. He agrees that not all animals should have as full legal rights as a fully cognizant adult human, but that chimpanzees and bonobos in particular are deserving of protection from enslavement, and invasive bodily harm. He is not asking for chimps to be allowed to vote, but for the American legal system to recognize something other than human as a living being, something deserving of more rights than a toaster.
Wise discusses the history of common law, and its role in the development of our current system. Not so long ago different groups of humans were denied basic rights by this system, i.e. slaves, women, and other minorities. During the era of slavery in America it was nearly unheard of to consider a slave a human being. They had no legal rights, although it is apparent that they are indeed human beings. Darwin stated that only members of the same species are capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring, and members of different races around the world have proven that skin color has nothing to do with ones humanity. However, at the time in history the law did not recognize them, and it was up to the supporters of equality to fight within the system to attain it. Today we look back at the perpetuation of such oppression with much shame and anger. The fact that it was allowed to exist for so long fuels the indignation of the nation. Wise and those like him are hoping that someday animal enslavement will also be an unsavory relic of the past.
In the following chapters Wise supports his theories with scientific data supporting the existence of animal minds. It is impossible to prove that anything is conscious, you and I included, but science shows as closely as possible that chimpanzee and bonobo minds work in very similar ways to human brains. As nearly as we can tell they are capable of emotion, and most certainly pain and suffering. Wise uses these reasons to claim for nonhuman animals the same basic rights that we claim for humans.
Wise, despite being a lawyer, writes in a very conversational tone, inviting the reader to join him on this journey that is easily understood by non-lawyers. All of his arguments are set out in logical procession, marked with humor and some very poignant reflections. There are many strong arguments supporting this issue, but until this book appeared there had been very few resources pulling all of them together in one deeply compelling web of logic and compassion. Wise is incredibly thorough in his arguments, attacking the problem from every angle, philosophical as well as legal and scientific. Just how many different sources of opinion and fact went into the making of this book is shown somewhat by the 66 pages of citations at the end of the book. He was able to filter through ages of legal studies, as well as scientific theory to create this work, the final product being a clear and concise jewel of a book.
The issue at stake in this book is one of life and death to those concerned. It is too late for countless animals that have been forced to suffer and die in laboratories, furthering science to preserve their captors, humans. This is a tragic loss, but as long as there are authors and activists like Steven Wise, Jane Goodall, (who wrote the forward to this book) and many other dedicated individuals and groups we may live to see nonhuman animal enslavement diminished, if not eradicated. This book is setting the stage for further motions in future generations. If this generation can put holes in the wall Wise discussed early in the book, allowing some nonhuman animals to come over to our side, at least in this author's humble opinion, it is a step in the right direction.
Rating:
Summary: The Animal Rightist's Bible
Review: Highly informative and inspiring, Rattling the Cage is quite possibly the best argument on the side of animals. While I found the lack of detail on animals besides primates somewhat depressing, the arguments can be applied to them (experiments have proven that animals do have emotions, contrary to popular belief). This book is, in my opinion, the definitive argument for animal rights
Rating:
Summary: The Animal Rightist's Bible
Review: Highly informative and inspiring, Rattling the Cage is quite possibly the best argument on the side of animals. While I found the lack of detail on animals besides primates somewhat depressing, the arguments can be applied to them (experiments have proven that animals do have emotions, contrary to popular belief). This book is, in my opinion, the definitive argument for animal rights
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing And Offensive
Review: I want my money back! Appealing title and cover reeled me in, I admit it. Only, once I opened the book I found page after page of the author's diatribe agains Christianity. Well, I am a Christian and that faith strengthens, not weakens my resolve to treat all of God's creatures with love and understanding. Too bad the author has a chip on his shoulder and I'm very sorry to see Jane Goodall associating herself with this book, especially since she spoke at my church headquarters in Missouri a couple of years ago as we gave her an award. As for me and my cat, we'd rather cuddle up together in a big chair and read the book of Daniel. (His favorite)
Rating:
Summary: A lawyer worth keeping!
Review: In 1960, Jane Goodall sent off word to the scientific community that she had noticed the chimpanzee of Gombe, Tanzania use a stick as a tool to catch termites. Anthropologist Louis Leakey sent back this brilliant line, "Now we must redefine tool, redefine man, or accept chimpanzees as human." Which is it? These lines are so poignant because we CANNOT deny the close nature of these amazing animals to our own. Sharing 98.3% DNA with chimpanzee is quite staggering! How could you deny that they are as brilliant as we can be??!! This book has some moments that may be slower reading, I know not everyone is interested in legal aspects of "personhood." The precedents can be interesting but the truly fascinating chapters are the ones which tell of the capabilities of chimpanzees. A particular favorite chapter of mine is CHIMPANZEE AND BONOBO MINDS. In this chapter you will read the work that has been done with chimpanzees that know sign-language and developmental studies which use Piaget's developmental scale for (human) infants and how they scored. *It is interesting to think that not too very long ago, in the 1970's, doctors didn't believe that human infants felt pain...circumcision was performed without the use of painkillers and many young babies who underwent surgery were not given anything for pain afterwards...the medical field can be VERY slow to change...* Chimpanzee are not the only animal discussed in the book, there are instances given of dolphins and orcas kept in captivity and other animals that have been poorly treated, requiring legal intervention. After reading the close bond we have with animals, it is sad to think that somewhere, right now, a chimpanzee sits in a cage, alone, bored, scared...
Rating:
Summary: A lawyer worth keeping!
Review: In 1960, Jane Goodall sent off word to the scientific community that she had noticed the chimpanzee of Gombe, Tanzania use a stick as a tool to catch termites. Anthropologist Louis Leakey sent back this brilliant line, "Now we must redefine tool, redefine man, or accept chimpanzees as human." Which is it? These lines are so poignant because we CANNOT deny the close nature of these amazing animals to our own. Sharing 98.3% DNA with chimpanzee is quite staggering! How could you deny that they are as brilliant as we can be??!! This book has some moments that may be slower reading, I know not everyone is interested in legal aspects of "personhood." The precedents can be interesting but the truly fascinating chapters are the ones which tell of the capabilities of chimpanzees. A particular favorite chapter of mine is CHIMPANZEE AND BONOBO MINDS. In this chapter you will read the work that has been done with chimpanzees that know sign-language and developmental studies which use Piaget's developmental scale for (human) infants and how they scored. *It is interesting to think that not too very long ago, in the 1970's, doctors didn't believe that human infants felt pain...circumcision was performed without the use of painkillers and many young babies who underwent surgery were not given anything for pain afterwards...the medical field can be VERY slow to change...* Chimpanzee are not the only animal discussed in the book, there are instances given of dolphins and orcas kept in captivity and other animals that have been poorly treated, requiring legal intervention. After reading the close bond we have with animals, it is sad to think that somewhere, right now, a chimpanzee sits in a cage, alone, bored, scared...
Rating:
Summary: The First True Animal Rights Law Book
Review: Others have written books about how to theoretically gain legal rights for animals, but Steve Wise is the first lawyer to present how to actually do it. Hope, now Mr. Wise will expand his knowledge to ALL animals. He does not propose that chimpanzee have the right to sue or to vote, but he does say they have the right to live their lives in peace without our involvement. Do they not have the right to have THEIR habitat protected? Do they not have the right to not be kidnapped from their family and homes and to be locked in a cage subjected to years of horrific and inhumane tests for the sole benefit of mankind? They DO have the right to be left alone. I guess it is a long road since mankind has no humanity for itself. Rattling the Cage is a must read book, not only for lawyers, but for all compassionate humans.
|
