Additionally,theresolutionrecommendsthatSpaintakesteps
ininternationalforumsandorganizationstoensurethatgreat
apes areprotectedfrom maltreatment, slavery, torture,and
being killed.
Incontrasttochangesintheconditionsinwhichfarmanimals
arekept,theSpanishresolutionissignificant,notbecauseof
the numbers of animals it directly affects, but because it
breaksdownthepreviouslyinsurmountablebarrierwehave
erectedbetweenourselves,asbeingswithrightsanddignity,
andnonhumananimals,asmerethings.Whenwelookatour
closestnonhumanrelatives,asresearcherslikeJaneGoodall
and Dian Fossey have helped us do, we see that the
differences between us and nonhuman animals are, in
important respects, matters of degree, not of kind. The
Spanishresolutionmarksthefirstofficialacceptanceofthe
moraland legalimplications ofrecognizingthesimilarities
between us and at least some nonhuman animals. Most
remarkable, perhaps, is the use of the term “slavery” in
respectofsomethingthatitiswrongtoinflictuponanimals,
foruntilnowithasbeenassumedthatanimalsarerightlyour
slaves,touseaswewish,whetherto pullourcarts,model
humandiseasesforresearch,orgiveuptheireggs,milk,or
fleshforustoeat.Recognitionbyanationalparliamentthatit
canbewrongtoenslaveanimalsisasignificantsteptoward
animal liberation.
Peter Singer
New York, November 2008