LaVrai.COM - The Truth

Matthew is a 26-year-old living in Vienna and he needs a guardian because the place where he is currently living is in danger of being closed. A woman has picked up his case and is fighting the European Union Court of Human Rights on his behalf so that someone can adopt him and prevent him from being killed or abused. Oh, I almost forgot to mention — Matthew is a chimpanzee.

His name is Matthew, he is 26 years old, and his supporters hope to take his case to the European Court of Human Rights.

But he won’t be able to give evidence on his own behalf - since he is a chimpanzee. Animal rights activists led by British teacher Paula Stibbe are fighting to have Matthew legally declared a ‘person’ so she can be appointed as his guardian if the bankrupt animal sanctuary where he lives in Vienna is forced to close. [LaVrai ~ I wish someone would fight this hard to have unborn 'fetuses' declared persons, so we can get back to calling an unborn child what it is, human]

An anonymous businessman has offered a substantial amount to cover his care, but under Austrian law only humans are entitled to have guardians.

The country’s supreme court has upheld a lower court ruling which rejected the activists’ request to have a trustee appointed for Matthew.

So now 36-year-old Miss Stibbe and the Vienna-based Association Against Animal Factories have filed an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

The insists that the chimp needs legal standing so a guardian can be appointed to look out for his interests - especially if the sanctuary shuts down.

Miss Stibbe, who is from Brighton but has lived in Vienna for several years, says she is not trying to get the chimp declared a human, just a person.

‘Everybody who knows him personally will see him as a person,’ she said.

‘In his home in the African jungle, he would have been well able to look after himself without a guardian.

But since he was abducted into an alien environment, traumatised and locked up in an enclosure, it did become necessary for me to act on his behalf to secure the donation money for him and to avoid his deportation. [LaVrai ~ And since babies are not conceived of their own free will, shouldn't the world find a better way of looking after them...?]

‘Since he has no close relatives, I am doing this as the person closest to him.’

The legal wrangle began in February 2007, when the sanctuary where Matthew lives with another chimp, Rosi, plus a crocodile filed for bankruptcy protection.

Activists want to ensure the apes do not wind up homeless. Both were captured as babies in Sierra Leone in 1982 and smuggled to Austria for use in pharmaceutical experiments.

Customs officers intercepted the shipment and turned the chimps over to the shelter. Their upkeep costs £4,000 a month.

Donors have offered to help, but under Austrian law, only a human can receive personal gifts.

Organisers could set up a foundation to collect cash for Matthew, whose life expectancy in captivity is about 60 years.

But they argue that only personhood would ensure he is not sold to someone outside Austria, where he is protected by strict animal cruelty laws.

In dismissing the activists’ request to get a guardian for Matthew, a lower court ruled that the chimp was neither mentally impaired nor in danger - the legal grounds required for a guardian to be appointed.

It did not directly address the issue of whether a chimpanzee can be considered a person.

Eberhart Theuer, the animal rights group’s chief legal adviser, said there is a legal precedent to appoint a guardian for an individual incapable of expressing himself.

‘As long as Matthew is not recognised as a person, he could be sold abroad or killed for economic reasons,’ Theuer said.

‘His life depends on this decision. This case is about the fundamental question: Who is the bearer of human rights? Who is a person according to the European Human Rights Charter?’ [LaVrai ~ Wow, I don't even know what to say about this one]

A spokesman for the court in Strasbourg said: ‘Any application regarding this chimpanzee will be considered at a primary level by a magistrate and a lawyer before we decide whether it deserves a full-blown hearing.’ (Source)

Before the animal activists start throwing stones, my only issue with this case is that folks would get so up in arms over fighting to have a chimp be declared a person so that it can gain some rights, but have no issue with having a baby — excuse me, unborn ‘fetus’ — killed for ‘social reasons.’ I do not dare speak against women and children who have been raped or whose lives have physically been in danger because of pregnancy — I cannot tell a woman or child who has been brutally raped that she has to carry her abuser’s seed to full term and birth. Having said that, however, I find it deplorable that women wait practically until the last minute (6 months) to have an abortion, or that women use abortion as just another form of ‘the pill.’

I reiterate, I do believe there is life at the moment of conception, but according to what I have read, conception doesn’t occur right away — that’s why it is important for rape victims to given preventable treatment within 24 hours of the crime — as I have read.

And in case you are wondering about my views on the chimps — I respect all life, since we all have one CREATOR, and based on this passage, GOD gave both animals and humans ‘life.’

Genesis 1:29-30

29And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

If GOD told Adam and Eve that every herb and tree that yields fruit is their ‘meat’ (save the fruit of one tree, of course) and then said HE had also given every beast of the earth and air ‘every green herb for meat’, and makes sure to note that there is life in the animals, too… I, too, must care about the animals. However, I cannot put an animal’s life over a human’s if it comes down to it. Anyone one of us who have pets love those animals dearly, but I would pray have no qualms about deciding if that last cup of milk should go to the baby or the cat.

And this is a total sidebar, but if GOD instructed Noah to take certain animals into the Ark with him, the LORD must have really liked HIS creation (considering HE also has ordered it so that these animals are ‘programmed’ to feed themselves in hunting, scouting, pollinating (bees), etc.). If GOD instructed Noah to make room and provide food for pairs of ‘birds,’ ‘animals’ and ‘creeping things’ — and HE put life in them…does that mean these animals have some sort of soul, too? That’s possible, I concede. But, before any of you want to stone me, I don’t take this to mean that animals are spiritual creatures — as we humans are…which is what brings us into agreement with our CREATOR GOD ALMIGHTY, no? I am not going to get into spirit versus soul, as this is already a sidebar (see ‘Further Reading’ below). Also, it appears, based on this passage, that we humans and animals of the earth and air were originally vegetarians. And (I’m almost done), I have to wonder — what of the creatures of the sea…? Perhaps they survived since they, being creatures that need water to live, surely can’t drown in a flood (Genesis 6)

Further Reading:

• Get Answers: Noah’s Flood

• The Soul Versus The Spirit

• Europe’s Abortion Rules (listed by country)

Popularity: 6% [?]