Should Chimpanzees and Bonobos be considered human?

by **heavycola** on Sun Sep 14, 2008 4:45 pm

brooksieb wrote:We're 99.4 percent related to them so why not? they are capable of learning sign language but uncapable of talking human languages, so until they can speak a human language i'm not ready to call them humans.

I'm so sorry, i thought this was a thread about people from Sunderland.

by **jiminski** on Sun Sep 14, 2008 4:53 pm

Ditocoaf wrote:
HapSmo19 wrote:So this is how the grassroots campaign to legalize man-monkey marriage gets started.

While I realize that you are joking, I feel I should clarify something:

I'm not questioning whether or not they should be considered humans; obviously they aren't. But should they be regarded as another intelligent species?

With endangered frogs being the least important of the vertebrates and slugs sitting in the lowest echelon of invertebrate life!

very simplistically: kill all slugs, Marry a great Ape! (but don't legally recognise them with regards suffrage or property ownership!)

Yeap i am with you Dito!

by **MeDeFe** on Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:52 pm

jiminski wrote:
chogori wrote:Following the definition of species, monkeys would have to produce fertile offspring with humans to be able to be classified as homo sapiens...

This is also why lions and tigers are of a different species; they only produce non-fertile offspring.

that is pretty much incorrect.

Fixed it for you.

Neoteny, would you get those salamanders or what they were that have interspecies sex? In the meantime I'll keep these guys occupied with debating why wolves, coyotes, jackals, dingos, dogs and foxes are considered separate species since most of them are crossbreeding quite successfully. Also, felidae hybrids aren't quite as infertile as it seems you'd like them, check out the lijagulep.

And the definition breaks down completely if you start talking about unicellular organisms and viruses.

Furthermore, being considered "human" or not should have no bearing on your rights, I see the capabilities on a personal level as far more important than having some largely undefined genetic make-up. Or would you deny any hypothetical intelligent extraterrestrial beings all rights just because they happen to have the wrong DNA?