VOA慢速英語(yǔ)：紐約法院裁定大象不是人
VOA慢速英語(yǔ)：紐約法院裁定大象不是人
Happy the elephant may be intelligent and worthy of our care, but she cannot be considered a person, New Yorks top court ruled on Tuesday.
紐約最高法院周二裁定，大象Happy可能很聰明，值得我們照顧，但它不能被視為一個(gè)人。
The closely watched legal case involved the Nonhuman Rights Project, NRP, and the Bronx Zoo.
這起備受關(guān)注的法律案件雙方為非人權(quán)項(xiàng)目(NRP)和布朗克斯動(dòng)物園。
Supporters at the Nonhuman Rights Project said Happy is an independent being with complex thinking abilities.They wanted her moved from what they say is a prison-like space she lives in at the zoo.They argued that she should have that right under law as "a person."
非人權(quán)項(xiàng)目的支持者說，Happy是一個(gè)獨(dú)立的人，具有復(fù)雜的思維能力。他們說Happy在動(dòng)物園里住的地方像監(jiān)獄一樣，希望她能搬出來。他們還爭(zhēng)辯說，根據(jù)法律，她應(yīng)該作為一個(gè)“人”享有這一權(quán)利。
The Bronx Zoo, where Happy lives, argued Happy is neither illegally imprisoned nor a person.The zoo and its supporters warned that a win for the Nonhuman Rights Projectcould open the door to more legal actions on behalf of animals, including pets, farm animals and other animals in zoos.
Happy居住的布朗克斯動(dòng)物園辯稱，Happy既沒有被非法監(jiān)禁，也不是人。動(dòng)物園及其支持者警告說，非人權(quán)項(xiàng)目的勝利可能會(huì)為動(dòng)物(包括寵物、農(nóng)場(chǎng)動(dòng)物和動(dòng)物園中的其他動(dòng)物)提起更多法律訴訟打開大門。
In a 5 to 2 decision, New Yorks Court of Appeals agreed with the Bronx Zoos argument.
最終結(jié)果5比2，紐約上訴法院判定布朗克斯動(dòng)物園獲勝。
The courts majority said the law to protect the liberty of human beings does not apply to a nonhuman animal like Happy.The majority added that giving Happy the right to dispute her place in the zoo would have a major "destabilizing impact on modern society."
最高法院的多數(shù)人表示，保護(hù)人類自由的法律不適用于像Happy這樣的非人類動(dòng)物。并且，讓Happy有權(quán)對(duì)她在動(dòng)物園的住所提出異議，將會(huì)對(duì)現(xiàn)代社會(huì)產(chǎn)生重大的破壞穩(wěn)定的影響。
Two judges on the high court disagreed with the majority.They wrote that being an animal does not prevent Happy from having legal rights.They called her captivity "unjust and inhumane."
高等法院的另外兩名法官對(duì)此有不同觀點(diǎn)。他們寫道，身為動(dòng)物并不妨礙Happy享有合法權(quán)利，他們稱她被囚禁是“不公正和不人道的”。
The ruling from New Yorks highest court cannot be appealed.The Nonhuman Rights Project has failed in similar cases, including those involving a chimpanzee in upstate New York named Tommy.
紐約最高法院的裁決不能上訴。非人權(quán)項(xiàng)目在類似的案件中失敗了，包括涉及紐約州北部一只名叫Tommy的黑猩猩的案件。
Steven Wise is the groups founder.He said, "We will take a really close look at why we lost, and well try to make sure that that doesnt happen again to the extent that we can."
史蒂文·懷斯是該項(xiàng)目的創(chuàng)始人。他說：“我們會(huì)認(rèn)真研究輸?shù)舻脑颍⒈M可能確保這種情況不會(huì)再次發(fā)生。”
Happy was born in the wild in Asia in the early 1970s.She was captured and brought as a 1-year-old to the United States.She arrived at the Bronx Zoo in 1977.
Happy上世紀(jì)70年代初出生在亞洲的野外，她在1歲時(shí)被捕并被帶到美國(guó)，于1977年來到布朗克斯動(dòng)物園。
Im Dan Friedell.
丹·弗里德爾報(bào)道。
Happy the elephant may be intelligent and worthy of our care, but she cannot be considered a person, New Yorks top court ruled on Tuesday.
紐約最高法院周二裁定，大象Happy可能很聰明，值得我們照顧，但它不能被視為一個(gè)人。
The closely watched legal case involved the Nonhuman Rights Project, NRP, and the Bronx Zoo.
這起備受關(guān)注的法律案件雙方為非人權(quán)項(xiàng)目(NRP)和布朗克斯動(dòng)物園。
Supporters at the Nonhuman Rights Project said Happy is an independent being with complex thinking abilities.They wanted her moved from what they say is a prison-like space she lives in at the zoo.They argued that she should have that right under law as "a person."
非人權(quán)項(xiàng)目的支持者說，Happy是一個(gè)獨(dú)立的人，具有復(fù)雜的思維能力。他們說Happy在動(dòng)物園里住的地方像監(jiān)獄一樣，希望她能搬出來。他們還爭(zhēng)辯說，根據(jù)法律，她應(yīng)該作為一個(gè)“人”享有這一權(quán)利。
The Bronx Zoo, where Happy lives, argued Happy is neither illegally imprisoned nor a person.The zoo and its supporters warned that a win for the Nonhuman Rights Projectcould open the door to more legal actions on behalf of animals, including pets, farm animals and other animals in zoos.
Happy居住的布朗克斯動(dòng)物園辯稱，Happy既沒有被非法監(jiān)禁，也不是人。動(dòng)物園及其支持者警告說，非人權(quán)項(xiàng)目的勝利可能會(huì)為動(dòng)物(包括寵物、農(nóng)場(chǎng)動(dòng)物和動(dòng)物園中的其他動(dòng)物)提起更多法律訴訟打開大門。
In a 5 to 2 decision, New Yorks Court of Appeals agreed with the Bronx Zoos argument.
最終結(jié)果5比2，紐約上訴法院判定布朗克斯動(dòng)物園獲勝。
The courts majority said the law to protect the liberty of human beings does not apply to a nonhuman animal like Happy.The majority added that giving Happy the right to dispute her place in the zoo would have a major "destabilizing impact on modern society."
最高法院的多數(shù)人表示，保護(hù)人類自由的法律不適用于像Happy這樣的非人類動(dòng)物。并且，讓Happy有權(quán)對(duì)她在動(dòng)物園的住所提出異議，將會(huì)對(duì)現(xiàn)代社會(huì)產(chǎn)生重大的破壞穩(wěn)定的影響。
Two judges on the high court disagreed with the majority.They wrote that being an animal does not prevent Happy from having legal rights.They called her captivity "unjust and inhumane."
高等法院的另外兩名法官對(duì)此有不同觀點(diǎn)。他們寫道，身為動(dòng)物并不妨礙Happy享有合法權(quán)利，他們稱她被囚禁是“不公正和不人道的”。
The ruling from New Yorks highest court cannot be appealed.The Nonhuman Rights Project has failed in similar cases, including those involving a chimpanzee in upstate New York named Tommy.
紐約最高法院的裁決不能上訴。非人權(quán)項(xiàng)目在類似的案件中失敗了，包括涉及紐約州北部一只名叫Tommy的黑猩猩的案件。
Steven Wise is the groups founder.He said, "We will take a really close look at why we lost, and well try to make sure that that doesnt happen again to the extent that we can."
史蒂文·懷斯是該項(xiàng)目的創(chuàng)始人。他說：“我們會(huì)認(rèn)真研究輸?shù)舻脑颍⒈M可能確保這種情況不會(huì)再次發(fā)生。”
Happy was born in the wild in Asia in the early 1970s.She was captured and brought as a 1-year-old to the United States.She arrived at the Bronx Zoo in 1977.
Happy上世紀(jì)70年代初出生在亞洲的野外，她在1歲時(shí)被捕并被帶到美國(guó)，于1977年來到布朗克斯動(dòng)物園。
Im Dan Friedell.
丹·弗里德爾報(bào)道。
- 用戶搜索
瘋狂英語(yǔ) 英語(yǔ)語(yǔ)法 新概念英語(yǔ) 走遍美國(guó) 四級(jí)聽力 英語(yǔ)音標(biāo) 英語(yǔ)入門 發(fā)音 美語(yǔ) 四級(jí) 新東方 七年級(jí) 賴世雄 zero是什么意思湛江市南油北苑小區(qū)英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)交流群
