Should Monkeys Be Considered Persons

I have read the different definitions of what is considered a person and I have to say that I still disagree with my opponent"s definition of a person and that whether or not an infant is considered a person is an entirely different debate topic. An infant should indeed be considered a person, they are sentient beings and they have legal rights. But an infant obviously cannot be held accountable for their actions and make rational decisions. According to the legal definition of a person, which as my opponent states is "an entity recognized by the law as separate and independent, with legal rights and existence including the ability to sue and be sued, to sign contracts, to receive gifts, to appear in court either by themselves or by lawyer and, generally, other powers incidental to the full expression of the entity in law", in infant would not be considered a person. Yet infants and young children still have rights. It could not be because they signed a contract, because clearly, they cannot understand and accept the terms and conditions of such a thing and would then not be able to sign the document, much like an animal. So why do infants and toddlers have rights, when they aren"t considered persons? Perhaps it is because they are given rights because people care about them, specifically their parents and family. (328.3.4) The same thing could go for animals. Because of the being"s loved ones" sentimental value and interest upon them, they are protected by rights. Infants and animals should then be considered persons due to the fact that they are sentient beings and that they do have rights. I also do not agree with my opponent about a human being "significantly much more conscious than an animal." Not all humans can necessarily, answer the question of "why we are here, how do we exist and where did we come from." Take into account an infant once more. An infant is clearly a human being, but would not be able to answer that question for mostly two reasons. One, since the newborn has only begun to live its life for a little while, it probably does not understand such questions, and two, it has not yet learned and accomplished how to speak properly. Animals would be under the same category, they may not be able to read and understand questions, and they definitely would not be able to talk and answer back in plain English. So in this case, levels of consciousness should not matter. It would be more appropriate to consider that both monkeys and humans are sentient. After all "pain is pain, wherever it occurs." (328.1.4) I must actually disagree with my opponent on the fact that mentally disabled persons can understand morals. Although I do agree that some mild diseases, ones in which it may not cloud their judgment and understanding of morals, may occur, there are many mental illnesses where the impaired being would not be able to function like the rest of us concerning the principles of what is considered right or what is considered wrong. In many cases of individuals with mental retardation, medical experts have determined that because of the reduced mental capacities, individuals with such a disability lack the capacity for many basic mental functions, such as, reasoning, memory, and most importantly, the ability to decipher between what is right and what is wrong. This means that many mentally retarded individuals do not fully understand the consequences of their own actions, nor fully understand the emotions that other individuals may be experiencing. (http://www.theonion.com...) In most cases of psychopathy, the individual has poor judgment, cannot decipher between the good and the bad, is unable to learn from previous mistakes, and simply is not able to experience emotions, such as, guilt, compassion, and sorrow. (http://www.cognethic.org...) In both of these mental illnesses, the individuals are unable to make moral decisions, but does this make them any less of a human being? Of course it does not, these people are human, sentient beings, much like monkeys who may not be able to make moral decisions, and they deserve rights as well.