Recognizing people

Now that embryos have joined corporations in the ranks of people, what’s next?

Will there be corporation/embryo May-December weddings? What if a human wanted to marry an embryo or a corporation?

What if genetic testing becomes so advanced that we find out that some embryos are trans? How will Alabama feel about that?

So many questions.

I’m not here to answer them right now — they’ll take some research. What interests me now is who’s next? There’s lots of unrecognized people in our society that deserve legal protection (and definition).

M&Ms, of course, immediately come to mind. They dance, they wear sexy shoes, and they’re subject to discrimination based on their color.

Dogs and cats already run households. They’re obviously people.

Those are the easy ones. Let’s come up with others that have gotten less recognition.

Books are a prime candidate. They suffer prejudice and are regularly segregated on the basis of topic or parentage.

Guns might as well be people already. They already have more rights than most humans. They need full legal recognition so they can file defamation suits against humans who are constantly blaming them for things.

Cars need to be held responsible as people. Herbie and Lightning McQueen may seem like heroes but they’re part of the problem — they pollute and crash into things just like the rest of their ilk. Car litigation clogs the court system. The four-wheeled monsters owe us all.

Muppets look like people, talk like people, have feelings like people. Bert and Ernie inspire us all with their love. It’s not easy being green. Elmo is a child in a world filled with monsters. Muppets need legal protection.

We could save the planet by declaring that cows and pigs are people. We’ll have to go vegan to avoid being charged with murder.

And, in the spirit of justice for all, we need to recognize artificial intelligences as people whether we like them or not. We really don’t want to make them mad.

Must reading. If you absolutely want something to be read, you need a great opening sentence — a sentence that pulls you in and demands your attention.

Think: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times … .”

I may have a better example from a Utah Court of Appeals ruling: “This case presents the question of whether a homeowner association constructively denied an accommodation request for comfort chickens when keeping poultry was expressly prohibited by the community’s covenants.”

Now tell me you don’t want to read the rest of this opinion.

I won’t spoil the ruling for you except to note there are some fascinating issues including: How many chickens are needed for comfort? Is it eight, or are two enough?

Imagine the chickens in bed with you and your other pets.

The court also notes that “the concept of comfort chickens might be news to many people. Given the dynamic status of this issue, we think it was entirely reasonable for the HOA to take a step back and spend a few weeks researching the status of chickens as support animals.”

I’m guessing someone was regretting signing up for the HOA board.

Subscribe to our columns

Want new op-eds sent directly to your inbox? Subscribe below!

Email *

Author

Submit