Can’t agree with you, michaelm.
We agree that animals have a right not to be abused, and sounds like Tommy’s situation qualifies as gratuitous abuse. That’s what SPCA organizations, and animal-cruelty laws, exist to address.
We don’t agree that the chimp necessarily has a right to “bodily liberty”. If it was being used as an experimental animal its situation might not be much better than Tommy’s, but there would have to be clear justifications for why a chimp and why the situation had to be quite that bad. If need can’t be proven, the research wouldn’t get funded and/or the animal-cruelty laws would be applicable. If need can be proven, and it can be shown that the researchers are being as kind as possible within that need … well, unless you can find humans to volunteer for those experiments, there may not be a reasonable alternative.
I’m all for treating life with the respect it deserves. But I still say that’s human obligation, not animal rights.
