"No Orangutan Writ of Habeas Corpus" & "Orangutan Declared a ‘Person’ by Argentine Court"

These two articles were definitely some of the most interesting that we've read so far. I was in shock the whole time I was reading these articles because I never thought I would read about people trying to get a monkey declared as a person. As much as big monkeys like orangutans and gorillas creep me out for being so human like, I would never agree with them being declared as a person. One of the reasons for Sandra being declared a person was because orangutans are able to form relationships. I think this statement is to broad because a lot of animals form relationships, either a mother and baby relationship or a relationship with a pack of the same animals, it's not anything rare in the animal kingdom. Although I don't agree with animals being kept in small enclosures, I don't think it takes them being declared a person to get them the help they need. If they're going to try and name a orangutan a person too get them out of their enclosure are they going to try and start naming every animal a person as well? If animal rights activists are only focusing on orangutans and maybe other monkeys, wouldn't they just be "monkey rights activists?" I think these people have gone a little too far in their fight for animal rights; they need to draw a line somewhere. These are still wild animals that we are talking about.