Jump to content

Non-human Sapients and their rights


Weldun

Recommended Posts

Firstly, an apology on the length of this post but if you are one the tl;dr crowd, please do me the courtesy of stopping here. The nature of the topic means that it will, at times, get a little wordy. Secondly, I do not live in the United States and as such, my understanding of the laws of the United States of America and the State of California is not necessarily solid. Lastly, while I would prefer if the topic remained specific to the non-human sapients described below, but the nature of such discussion is that we will digress into a broader aspect of the topic, hence the thread title.

 

In my Champions game, I had phenomenon of recent history that unleashed several hundred thousand intelligent creatures based on various animals. Most of whom have a bipedal stance, hands with opposable thumbs and the ability to communicate complex concepts, usually by human or human-like speech. In simple terms, mutant animals of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles variety, but I felt it important to word it that way. These creatures are commonly referred to as "Moreaus" and were created artificially in several laboratory facilities. Their creation was illegal and their events leading to their release are still not entirely known. But it raises an important issue and that is, what are their rights?

 

From Champions Universe, this piece that pertains to the legal status of Moreaus.
"A number of Supreme Court rulings have stated that the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantees of due process and equal protection do not apply to sentient aliens, extradimensional entities, artificial intelligences, and the undead, because they are not “persons” under the law. On the other hand, they do apply to mutants, mutates, clones, and genetic constructs based on human stock. Congress has, however, passed laws granting at least limited rights to all “independent, free-willed, sentient entities” in American territory."

Yes, some human DNA was used in their creation, but they are derived primarily from various animals, not from human stock. Based on my reading of the 14th Amendment, what the first part of this statement means for Moreausis that they are not citizens, despite having been born/created within the United States, and thus are not subject to the privileges or immunities that citizens enjoy. Additionally, the are not guaranteed protection of life, liberty or property without due process of law and the equal protection of the laws.

 

What are these "privileges or immunities?" Well, a Supreme Court ruling that has "not been overruled and has been specifically reaffirmed several times" outlines them specifically. They are, "access to seaports and navigable waterways, the right to run for federal office, the protection of the federal government while on the high seas or in the jurisdiction of a foreign country, the right to travel to the seat of government, the right to peaceably assemble and petition the government, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, and the right to participate in the government's administration." There was also something called the Slaughterhouse cases that went into definitions of the Right to Travel, but they made my eyes cross from trying to navigate the wording so if someone could explain it, I'd love some insight.

 

Moreaus can technically be detained without charges, questioned without being made aware of what few rights they do possess and have no recourse to seek remedy for illegal confinement.

 

So what about these "limited rights?"

 

An opinion from a Senior Judge from Washington State (IRL) on the subject about Extraterrestrials and Murder/Assault was, "In the absence of other precedents, and of direct statutes, something that could be assumed to be an extraterrestrial alien would almost certainly have the same protections and obligations under the law as a human foreign national. In other words, kill them and it's murder, injure them and it's assault, and the other way around."

 

So, it's logical to assume that this opinion was one of those "limited rights." But what others exist?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This is a really tough question. You have to have a federal oversight committee created by the government in order to insure that the states don't run around passing crazy laws about what people can and can't do to them. If you're really serious and into deep roleplay moments, create some NPCs and have the PC"s BE the federal oversight committee for a session. Let them decide what kind of rights these creatures should have. 

 

Technically, the American Civil Liberties Union would probably step in at this point on behalf of the Moreaus, and address mistreatment of the creatures. Other Moreaus would flee to other nations with more liberal laws, while still others would rail against "The Humans that Created Us" and seek to punish, destroy, or replace them. 

 

You've got a whole mess of options. That's really the point of this.

 

Your focus should be

 

1) How much do the players want to be involved in dealing with these creatures? If "Hell no", handwave it until you want Moreaus to be supervillains.

 

2) If yes, find out just how much they want to be involved. You have a responsibility to let everyone enjoy themselves without Law and Order: Special Metaanthroplogy Victims Unit taking over the game. 

 

3) What kind of world are you interested in having this turn out to be, and how are things going to be changed? If these creatures are ONLY in California, they'll probably be granted full rights within a year. If they're all over the US, a federal oversight committee will likely be created. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoever created them, or someone who CLAIMS to be responsible for creating them, are likely to assert property rights. If something is not legally recognized as a person, then owning, buying, selling, and exploiting it wouldn't be legally recognized as slavery.

 

But at worst, they would still have the legal protections that NON-talking animals have. A law banning dog fighting still applies if the dogs are fighting with kung-fu moves and can say "My kung-fu is greater, I shall be victorious!" Anyone laying claim to a moreau would be held responsible for its food, water, shelter, and veterinary care.

 

Unclaimed individuals might find themselves "wards of the state" like any stray dog. It won't come to the ugliest possible result of that because there will always be someone to "adopt" a "stray" that can talk.

 

Status as useful and desirable will be a double edged sword; there will certainly be those arguing to classify them as "property" and thus even more freely exploitable than they would be as non-citizen people.

 

Inevitably they will be exploited for other people's agendas. PETA for example will be eager to recruit talking animal spokesmen willing to take the position "ALL animals deserve the same rights as humans, whether they can ask for them or not." Some moreaus might agree with that sentiment but many are sure to see it as counterproductive and argue that securing freedom and civil recognition for themselves depends on DIFFERENTIATING themselves from the non-sapient.

 

 

Alongside the legal wrangle, there will be a big theological buzz, and the two will effect each other. Even those who think the creation of such things is "playing God" and sinful might say that the creatures themselves are innocent souls...or might assert that they are still beasts over which the descendants of Adam ought to have dominion, or even conclude that they are abominations and should be destroyed. If too many Americans come to the last conclusion, it will be an uphill struggle to get them any legal protection.

 

 

There may be ridiculous differences in how they are treated depending on the laws covering the base species. Setting aside the question of whether they may be killed with impunity, some will die from time to time in accidents. It might be perfectly legal for a human to consume the flesh of a talking cow (not while it's still talking - you know what I mean) but not that of a talking horse. Conversely, while alive, the horse might be able to travel more or less freely but the cow could be restricted from leaving or entering some countries by regulations put in place in response to mad cow disease.

 

Before there is federal action on the matter, if there ever is, expect a patchwork of legislation from the states. If talking animals are seen as valued additions to a community, one state may pass sweeping protections for them or recognize them as persons to encourage them to immigrate. If they are seen as dangerous and threatening, states may pass laws forbidding them entry, period.

 

If moreus are legal property in one place and recognized as free people in another, well, look at US history before the civil war for ideas on how that plays out.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Conspicuous by its absence....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The legal status of Moreaus would probably be determined by how genetically close to mankind they are. If only 10% of their genetic makeup is from human stock, that's a different starting point than if 60% of their genes are human. Since artificial intelligences and aliens are not persons per the quote in the OP, I doubt that Moreaus will be viewed differently unless a majority of their genetics is determined to be of human origin, then they fit into the category of persons.

 

Civil rights groups will probably start initiating court cases immediately, if they are being bought and sold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When your RPG game company's Line Developer is a lawyer, it's not surprising that legal issues will get some attention in your setting books. ;)  Steve Long gave a lot more attention to legal issues in a superhero world in the Stronghold book, including more regarding non-humans under American law. Since this thread started with Steve's writings, this seems like a good time and place to transcribe the rest, from Stronghold p. 30:

 

_____________________________________________

 

 

The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees due process of law and equal protection of the law to all persons in the United States... Two important issues concerning superhumans have arisen under this Amendment...

 

The second and more important issue is the rights of so-called "non-humans":  alien and extra-dimensional life-forms; artificially intelligent computers, androids, and robots; human mutants; the undead; clones and genetic constructs; and so forth. The Supreme Court dealt with this question in 1978 in six consolidated cases... The Court stated:

 

The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees of due process and equal protection extend to all persons within the United States or its territories. But ... the term "persons" means humans. Neither alien and extra-dimensional life forms, nor artificial intelligences, nor the undead are "persons," and hence they have no rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.

 

Mutants, mutates, clones, and genetic constructs from human stock are a different matter. Essentially, they are "subspecies" of humanity. In many cases, even the most thorough examination of them cannot differentiate them from humans. They are so close to begin human that there is no legal justification for considering them not to be human. We hold that free-willed mutants, mutates, clones, and genetic constructs, from human stock are "persons" under the Fourteenth Amendment and are possessed of all rights thereunder...

 

In response, Congress passed the Android, Artificial Intelligence, and Alien Life-Forms Rights Act of 1979 (usually known as the "Triple-A Act"). The Triple-A Act grants civil rights to most "sentient" beings who can prove that they are independent and free-willed. The law defines "sentience" in various ways, usually relating to the capacity for creative and philosophical thought, not just problem-solving capability. Most states have also enacted laws or passed their own constitutional amendments granting "alternate sentiences" various civil rights. However, this law and all related laws, state and federal, make one exception: the undead do not have civil rights. The legal ramifications of that, particularly the question of who owns the formerly deceased's property, combined with the typically evil or destructive nature of such beings, has kept them outside the ambit of the laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using the above as a starting-point for discussion, I suspect one of the first issues in establishing legal rights and protections for these Moreaus, could be a working legal definition of "sentience" (which isn't an accurate scientific term BTW -- even an amoeba is sentient), and standards for testing that capacity in Moreaus.

 

Even drawing an analogy between Moreaus and slaves, in various societies where slavery was legal, there were often laws in place protecting them from excessive abuse, either from corporal punishment or denial of the necessities of life (with penalties to their owners); or granting them the right to marry and own property. In many societies slavery might be temporary, as a punishment for a crime or a way to work off a debt; or the slave could buy or be granted freedom.

 

As a variation on that last point, in the CU the simian super-scientist, Dr. Silverback, went to court in the United Kingdom to establish his rights, and was judged equal to a human and made a naturalized UK citizen. It might make for an interesting role-playing opportunity for your PCs to champion the rights of Moreaus in the court system. Not necessarily to play out a courtroom scenario, but to add high-profile pressure to hear the case. If one of your PCs, or an NPC they're fond of, is a Moreau that would add personal stakes to the scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what about these "limited rights?"

 

An opinion from a Senior Judge from Washington State (IRL) on the subject about Extraterrestrials and Murder/Assault was, "In the absence of other precedents, and of direct statutes, something that could be assumed to be an extraterrestrial alien would almost certainly have the same protections and obligations under the law as a human foreign national. In other words, kill them and it's murder, injure them and it's assault, and the other way around."

 

So, it's logical to assume that this opinion was one of those "limited rights." But what others exist?

Love to see the citation on this by the way. But there is a critical difference between the creatures you describe, and an extraterrestrial.

 

An Amendment to the US Constitution defines any person born in the US as a citizen. Now, it's true that the law can be illogical and inconsistent, but if talking animals born in the US win recognition as persons, it may be hard to keep them from being recognized as citizens. I could definitely see that happening, though - like I said the law can be illogical and inconsistent.

 

 

But if they do get that status - accorded the same standing as "foreign nationals" i.e. as people but not citizens - expect that some at least will try to follow the path of naturalization and earn citizenship that way.

 

 

Perhaps loosely connected to that issue....

 

Sooner or later, a human and a talking animal are going to try to get married.

 

Sooner or later, a human will try to legally adopt a talking animal as their child.

 

Sooner or later, a talking animal family will want to adopt a human baby. Whatever name they give the child, expect the media to dub them "Tarzan" or "Mowgli."

 

 

Yeah, things would get hairy. Maybe even furry.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Oh, I'm just giving it a little time off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Family Law will be one area strongly impacted by the addition of non-human persons in large numbers.

 

Are Moreaus close enough genetically to inter-breed with humans? Would it be considered bestiality? Are they all far superior to humans in physical ability, or are most closer to human ability with some minor extras?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it be considered bestiality?

Or second bestiality, or not-that-goodiality?

 

But fascinating as these topics are for some of us, not every gaming table will need to explore every possible ramification of the weird things in their setting. Even someone playing a female talking beast may not want to consider questions such as, does she go into heat? and, what does she get up to and with whom when she does?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Fortunately there are things I don't have to worry about....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for all the insights and comments so far. I fear that I was remiss, however, in failing to mention that the breakout was 12 years prior to the campaign start. One of my players is playing a Moreau (a mutant Hero Shrew) and another is playing a philanthropic businessman with a progressive hiring policy regarding non-human sapients. (At our table we use the terms sapient and sophont, the later referring to those who verifiably can be affected by powers that target "souls.")

 

@Lord Liaden: Thank you for that reference to Stronghold. As I mainly use my PDF collection and Stronghold hadn't come up in previous games, I hadn't really looked there as we have a physical copy but I do not possess the PDF. Unfortunately Steve has still been somewhat ambiguous and left it to GMs to determine what rights have been extended to non-human sapients and that leaves me with the same conundrum. That's the downside to a Lawyer. Trying to nail them down to a definitive statement (without precedent) is like nailing gelatin to a tree. :P

 

@Lucius: The opinion was, unfortunately, unpublished and is anecdotal in nature as the question was put forward by a relative as part of a thought exercise and comes from a post in a old thread from ten years ago by Cancer.

 

@Steve: Moreaus are not related to humans and cannot interbreed with them, but a plot point has been that they can (so long as they are still physically compatible) interbreed with their baseline species and their anthropomorphic traits are incredibly dominant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, since they are primarily of animal DNA with an addition of a small portion of human DNA (uplifted animals, which is what I am getting from Weldun's posts), treating them like sentient aliens would seem closest to how the law would likely see them. They aren't persons because they differ so much from humans, so they wouldn't have the rights of humans.

 

That said, the TV series "Alien Nation" might give you some ideas on how to treat societal reactions.

 

Do most live in something like "Moreau Towns" inside big cities and keep to themselves or are they more integrated? Do Moreau children go to school with humans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

megaplayboy had a legal thread and this would have been ideal for it. it is in the archives. I'll see if I can post a link.

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/55495-calling-all-lawyers-supers-and-unique-legal-issues/?hl=legal

 

I raised one about the Undead but there are other ones that might be of interest and be relevant to Weldun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, since they are primarily of animal DNA with an addition of a small portion of human DNA (uplifted animals, which is what I am getting from Weldun's posts), treating them like sentient aliens would seem closest to how the law would likely see them. They aren't persons because they differ so much from humans, so they wouldn't have the rights of humans.

 

That said, the TV series "Alien Nation" might give you some ideas on how to treat societal reactions.

 

Do most live in something like "Moreau Towns" inside big cities and keep to themselves or are they more integrated? Do Moreau children go to school with humans?

Gods-damnit! That's just embarrassing and if Sundog ever finds out, he'll never let me hear the end of it. I'm a huge Alien Nation fan. But yes, the largest concentration is in a district known to most residents by the unofficial name, "The Zoo." About half of the Moreaus in the city live there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where do the other half live? Are they owned by human familes as pets? Are most Moreaus in this one city?

 

Do I have it correct that most Moreaus are not superhuman, just mildly enhanced when compared to a regular human? If a large percentage of them are superhuman, that changes the calculation a bit. Super-powered non-humans in the hundreds or thousands would be scarier than beings that may only have enhanced senses and some low-level stat increases.

 

Movies like "Planet of the Apes" might be considered racist by Moreau rights groups, stoking fears that the Moreaus will rise up and kill the humans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my game the clones don't get rights, because of multiple attempts to take over the country/city/world with armies of clones. If the fingerprints are the same and the signature is the same, your clone can live your life with no one the wiser and there's no way to prove it. Therefore, if you're a clone, you have big problems. And yes, there are characters concealing their cloniness from the government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Steve: The rest of the city's Moreaus are scattered around the city, another element of "street" lifestyle. The majority of Moreaus only exceed human capabilities in certain areas, most notably the senses as they tend to retain most of their base species' sensory abilities. But Moreaus do have a noticeably larger percentage of "enhanced-level" individuals and many possess limited psychic abilities. This has brought the attentions of numerous groups including PSI, VIPER (who loves to recruit reptiles and snakes) and other groups. The sheer variety of species and abilities has baffled observers, as it brings into question just what Genesys' plan for them was. Many Moreaus work low end jobs or have turned to criminal pursuits. The Moreau PC in my game is the bouncer at a Moreau stripclub where half the permanent staff also work as prostitutes.

 

@Freakboy6117: Thank you for that, actually. I can see where issues with it might arise, but that also opens up some potential story ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Steve: Moreaus are not related to humans and cannot interbreed with them, but a plot point has been that they can (so long as they are still physically compatible) interbreed with their baseline species and their anthropomorphic traits are incredibly dominant.

Raising another tricky issue.

 

If Moreaus are considered people and therefore other people having sex with them is not bestiality, is a Moreau having sex with a non-sapient member of its baseline species considered bestiality?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Ignore this tagline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm wondering if Moreaus are more physically human-like than I originally thought, if they can find work as strippers and prostitutes. Unless the clientele is composed of other Moreaus?

 

If Genesys was able to uplift animals, that might have been only Stage One, a form of animal experimentation in seeing how well their genetic recombination methods worked. Adding animal characteristics to humans could be Stage Two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, non-human mammals have a high degree of genetic similarity to humans. Obviously it's greatest in great apes. This means that there's not that much differentiation between "animal DNA" and "human DNA", even in the baseline species, and no doubt even less for Moreaus.

 

There's probably only a fairly limited scientific basis for declaring Moreaus non-human.

 

(And for the record, absolutely none for doing that to clones. Cloning humans may be illegal, but once created clones would be fully human. If they aren't they aren't clones.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raising another tricky issue.

 

If Moreaus are considered people and therefore other people having sex with them is not bestiality, is a Moreau having sex with a non-sapient member of its baseline species considered bestiality?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Ignore this tagline

Fortunately most Moreaus view it as bestiality and this aspect is not widely known as most of the cases involved "feral" Moreaus. Moreaus that didn't have significantly human physical characteristics and could readily pass for a normal member of their species. But another issue is the wide range of species. Most Moreaus will have to be very careful in the coming generations if they want to avoid becoming as inbred as an Austrian Duke.

 

I'm wondering if Moreaus are more physically human-like than I originally thought, if they can find work as strippers and prostitutes. Unless the clientele is composed of other Moreaus?

 

If Genesys was able to uplift animals, that might have been only Stage One, a form of animal experimentation in seeing how well their genetic recombination methods worked. Adding animal characteristics to humans could be Stage Two.

Most Moreaus fall into the Petting Zoo People trope, with rare instances of differences. I admit to being heavily influenced by Eastman and Laird in my youth and later Palladium' After The Bomb and Rifts settings. (Hate the system, though.) And a fair amount of their clientele is human. Just because Moreaus have a nebulous place in law hasn't stopped social acclimation with the Zoo being a bit of a tourist attraction, especially the Moreau flea-market ("The Agora") in the Zoo. Moreaus are becoming the new normal in the city, but that's still a far cry from recognizing them as equals under the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, non-human mammals have a high degree of genetic similarity to humans. Obviously it's greatest in great apes. This means that there's not that much differentiation between "animal DNA" and "human DNA", even in the baseline species, and no doubt even less for Moreaus.

That's part of what stops them from being recognized as "persons" though, isn't it? You'll get slippery slope arguments and people arguing that while the humans have DNA that is 97% to 98.4% identical to chimpanzees and bonobos, these apes don't have the same rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These speculative questions regarding rights and laws are tough questions.  They would probably be the source of strong debate in real life with no real certainty of who would take what side.  Basically, you have to start with the difference between human rights and civil rights.  Human rights are those rights that are granted by virtue of being human.  For the most part, people agree on what counts as rights, but they disagree on how human individuals are, and therefore, the disagree to what extent human rights are valid for the individual.  As to civil rights, those are the rights accorded to those who are classified as citizens of a particular principality.  There can also be divisions regarding who is counted as a citizen.  The first issue to be resolved is are Moreaus sufficiently human to be classified as human, and the second is do they qualify as citizens of the United States.  I would not make that determination based on my real world views.  My real world views are if they are sapient they are sufficiently human to be accorded human rights, and if they were created in America by Americans, citizenship should be conferred to them.  In my game world though, I would make that determination based on the underlying philosophies, opinions, and prejudices of the game world determine the outcome.  In a game world that is more Silver Age and Golden Age in scope, I am inclined to believe that Americans would be inclusive enough to afford them human rights, and would either accord them with citizenship either en mass or on an individual-by-individual basis.  In a Bronze Age or Iron Age game world, they would probably be on the receiving end of a lot prejudice, hatred, and possibly violence by the masses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my last few campaigns I had aliens, androids, drones(clone replicants designed and "programmed"), undead, other dimensional beings, sapient anthropomorphs,etc. The biggest issues were the treatment of artificial beings(droids and drones). Eventually, governments and industry created a system for assessing sapience/humanity. The Turing, Emotive, Autonomy, Motivational Assessment, or TEAM assessment, assigns a component score from 0 to 5 in each sub-category, for a total of 20 possible points. The Turing test is essentially a measure of how long a person can converse with the test subject until they realize they are not speaking with a "person". The Emotive test measures the test subject's capacity for empathy, emotional expression and ability to recognize emotional and social cues in others and respond appropriately. The Autonomy test measures the test subject's ability for independence, problem solving and proactive planning. The Motivational test assesses the ability of the test subject to form their own interests and goals, including whether they are able to override a "programmed" goal in order to fulfill a purpose of their own creation. A perfect score of 20 is generally not required. Usually a rating above 12(sometimes higher in some jurisdictions) is sufficient to grant legal personhood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...