Monkeys should be considered persons.

1. You said and I quote "I agree with on number 1; humans are self-legislative and morally autonomous. In addition, monkeys or animals also have just like humans."- Are you claiming monkeys and other animals are self legislative and morally autonomous? Also you stated "In the 16th century, philosopher Descartes stated that animals were just automata. Automata(autonomous) is any red-blooded machines without thoughts or wishes." The statement you used essentially reading "Animals are as autonomous as any red blooded machines without thoughts or wishes" does not help your side what so ever but seems as if it helps my side. According to your statment Descartes never mentioned the word humans but he did describe "red blooded machines without thoughts or wishes." Human beings clearly are not the red blooded machines without thoughts or wishes but instead animals. I interpret that quote as saying all animals are equally autonomous because they do not have thoughts nor wishes. Bacteria along with animals do not have thoughts or wishes, are you suggesting that bacteria also deserves the rights as you and I? I believe you should ask a monkey or any animal of your choosing whether or not they would like to be considered a person, if you can generate and sort of understandable response I believe it would be a breakthrough for the animal kingdom. 2. You have asked me to refer back to one of your original premises but in order for said premise to be acknowledged it must first be put into standard form. As I previously stated premises 4-7 are illegible because they are not put into standard form. 2. I agree with you, monkeys AND children do not possess the ability to intelligently defend themselves within a court of law. To be recognized as a person within a court of law you must be able to intelligently defend yourself, this point is arguably the most important piece of evidence in deeming monkeys unable to posses rights. That is why monkeys, animals, and children have legal guardians and that is also why monkeys will never be considered a persons. 3-4.Within premises 3 and 4 I am speaking about the holder of rights, the holders of rights are exclusively human beings. Who do you call when an animal breaks the law? How do you arrest a lion? Tiger? Rabbit? Pig? Frog? Gorilla? The police force has a difficult enough time dealing with rational human beings, now they must worry about animals breaking the law? Affording a monkey a trail by jury made up of his peers would mean that a jury of monkeys and a judge who is also a monkey must determine whether or not the defendant was guilty or not. If this is not true please explain how a monkey would be tried in court. Also where would convicted monkeys spend their time in prison? The whole point of prison is to remove an irrational being from society and give them time away from society to realize the crime they committed was wrong. A monkey or any other animal simply can"t decipher between right or wrong let alone realize they committed a crime, that they did a bad thing. If monkeys were afford the same rights as human beings theoretically a monkey could run for president, a monkey could win the presidential election" Imagine that. Animals do not have the physical ability to communicate these emotions in an understandable and intelligent manner. 6. As previously stated animals deserve to be treated in a human manner. Some people may feel that TORTUREING AN ANIMAL OR HUMAN MAY BE MINIMALLY MORALLY JUSTIFIABLE in certain situations but I disagree. Torture of an animal or human will never be minimally morally justifiable, we can agree on that? 7. Adults are tasked with the responsibility to take care of the members of their family that simply could not take care of themselves such as children and family pets. 8. To be considered a person under the law you must follow the law. You just conceded the fact that no animal could follow the law within our society. 9. Your original claim put monkeys and all other animals on the same level and you culminated all of your points to say "Monkeys are animals and animals have all the rights listed above" therefore you are no longer arguing for monkeys but all animals to be considered persons under the law. I do not agree with your definition of rights. I do agree with your definition of "Persons"