The District Judge held that the Thirteenth Amendment applied solely only to humans and that PETA’s claims were lacking legal evidence. Many of the media reported that “it was a waste of time and money” to have this case held. In Sam Hawke’s article Animal Citizenship, Animal Sovereignty: A Review of Donaldson and Kymlicka’s Zooploi, Hawk quotes media and internet commentary stating that “Whales are not people, so you cannot enslave something like a whale.” But are whales living and breathing creatures? The word enslaves means to make into or as if into a slave. To enslave it tyrannize creatures, so Sam Hawke and thousands of others believe that you can enslave something like a whale.
   With every story there are two sides. Yes, animals do have rights but to what extent? According to Sam Hawke’s article, “Even more [insane] are claims as to the insult and ridicule of any seeming equivalence between the struggle of black slaves for freedom and a cetacean [sea animals] anti-slavery movement.” The reality of the Sea World incident is that enslaving whales and enslaving humans are seen in two different lights. The Thirteenth Amendment was created initially to put a stop to slavery of humans, not animals. Some state that allowing animals to have the same rights as humans also gives them the right to vote. During an interview with NBC, one woman stated, “If we allow animals to have our rights then that means we could elect an animal as president, as long as they meet the presidential requirement.” These opinions may seem ridiculous; but they make the same point. Animals deserve rights but not the same rights as humans.
   Remember the difference between opinions and facts. You may have the opinion that animal rights and human rights should not be the same, but the fact is that there are some humans that treat animals just like other humans. It’s common to see dogs, cats, and monkeys wearing sweatshirts or given their own bed to sleep in. What is your opinion, do animals deserve rights? If so, to what extent?