Is the Humane Party anti-vaccination (“anti-vax”)?

No. Vaccination has proven to be one of the most effective public health measures in history.

If a particular vaccine is tested in an unethical manner (e.g., tested without the informed consent of the person being tested), the HP would oppose that testing for the same reason it opposes torture/vivisection in all other contexts.  See, e.g., Humane Party Platform §10 .

What is the “Violence Is Not Entertainment” (VINE) Act?

The “Violence Is Not Entertainment” (VINE) Act is a proposed update of U.S. intellectual property law.  Under the VINE Act, animal abusers can no longer establish, maintain, or enforce intellectual property (“IP”) rights in material that includes abuse of a live animal.

The VINE Act directly impacts two bodies of IP law at the federal level—copyright and trademark—and serves as a model for analogous legislation at the state level.  Drafting of a separate act abolishing patent eligibility for animal-abuse methods and devices is also underway.


Materials described in 17 U.S.C. 102—such as still photographs, video recordings, or audio recordings—will be excluded from copyright eligibility if those materials record acts of animal abuse.  For example, property rights under U.S. law no longer attach to materials recording bullfights, dogfights, cockfights, horse races, dog races, animal sacrifices, vivisection, bestiality, or rodeo events, regardless of where those materials are recorded.

This portion of the VINE Act depropertizes only those materials that visibly or audibly record abuse of an actual, living animal.  For example, illustrations, animations, and computer-generated simulations of animal abuse are unaffected by the VINE Act.


Marks for goods and services that necessarily require death or mutilation will no longer be registrable with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), and such marks that have already been registered will no longer be recognized as property under U.S. law.  For example, the USPTO no longer grants, renews, or otherwise recognizes registration of marks wherein the identified goods include dead body parts, such as fur, skin, bone, ivory, or muscle tissue.

The VINE Act does not restrict, encumber, or otherwise affect the creation, financing, production, possession, reproduction, distribution, transmission, hosting, storing, advertising, marketing, publication, sale, rental, loan, display, viewing, or consumption of animal-abuse materials. Rather, the VINE Act merely withdraws Congress-created intellectual property status from such materials.  Therefore, free speech rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution are unaffected by the VINE Act.

An initial draft of the VINE Act will be published for public comments and editorial suggestions later in 2016.  Suggestions received from the public during the public-comment period will be reviewed, and the text of the VINE Act will be revised to incorporate such suggestions as appropriate.

What are the primary effects and impact of the Abolition Amendment?

Death line

The specific language of the first draft of the Abolition Amendment was subject to public commentary through Jan. 25, 2016, and the second draft was subject to public comment through March 31, 2016.  While the final wording of the Abolition Amendment—scheduled for publication on Abolition Day, 2016—may differ from these drafts, here are some general comments.

Some effects of the Abolition Amendment are the same as those of the APE Amendment (final draft published Dec. 6, 2015) and the 13th Amendment (ratified Dec. 6, 1865), which forbid primate slavery and human slavery, respectively.

The key distinction between the Abolition Amendment and these prior amendments is that the Abolition Amendment abolishes the property status of any and all animals—not just that of humans or primates.  In so doing, the Abolition Amendment puts an immediate end to all remaining animal-killing-based and exploitation-based industries, including:

  • meat
  • fish
  • poultry
  • dairy, veal
  • eggs
  • leather
  • fur
  • rodeos
  • vivisection (“animal testing”)

Removing these inherently violent and oppressive industries and practices from our nation represents the culmination of a political movement toward freedom and liberty that began more than 200 years ago in the United States.  Abolition also ushers in a new day of economic prosperity, national security, and environmental recovery.

What are the primary effects and impact of the APE Amendment?

APE Amendment

The primary effects and impact of the American Primate Emancipation Amendment (or APE Amendment) are those of:

1. Abolishing slavery with respect to all primates. Just as the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution served to abolish the institution of human slavery within the U.S., the APE Amendment abolishes the institution of slavery for all other primates. Such abolition means that primates—including apes, monkeys, chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans, and several other mammalian species who are particularly closely related to homo sapiens—can no longer be treated as “property” and therefore can no longer be used for entertainment purposes, vivisection, or other forms of exploitation.

2. Recognizing the availability of the writ of habeas corpus for protecting the rights of all primates. The writ of habeas corpus is a key procedural mechanism for protecting the substantive rights of individuals in the American legal system. This mechanism allows demand, through a legal proceeding, that either (i) an adequate reason for holding an individual in captivity be demonstrated or (ii) the individual be released. By explicitly making the writ of habeas corpus available for safeguarding the rights of all primates, the APE Amendment activates a key vehicle for ensuring that other primates are free from slavery not only in theory but in actuality.

3. Providing a guardian ad litem when necessary to protect the rights of a primate. In the American legal system, when an individual does not have the capacity to properly protect his or her rights (e.g., an infant), a guardian ad litem can be appointed to act on behalf of the incapacitated individual. By explicitly making the guardian ad litem procedural mechanism available for use with respect to all primates, the APE Amendment activates another key vehicle for ensuring that other primates are free from slavery not only in theory but in actuality.

4. Eliminating the 13th Amendment exception for slavery in criminal cases. The language of the 13th Amendment provides an exception to its general prohibition of human slavery, namely, an exception for “punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted”. The APE Amendment eliminates this exception, both for humans and for all other primates.  In closing this loophole, the APE Amendment directly affects humans and enhances humans’ civil rights in the United States.  This enhanced protection of human rights is particularly relevant and important in America today, where the Democrat-Republican bloc has incarcerated the largest population of prisoners in the world and has transformed the criminal justice system into a for-profit prison system.

APE Amendment
APE Amendment

Does the Humane Party subscribe to the humane myth?

Humane Slaughter

No.  The Humane Party has never, at any point, subscribed to the “humane myth”.

The phrase “humane slaughter” is an oxymoron, and the underlying concept makes no more sense than that of, for example, “humane rape” or “humane vivisection”.  The Humane Party has never endorsed any form of animal-exploitation product—meat, dairy, eggs, leather, or other—as being “humane”.