I'm really with Masa on this one. Pluto could be classified as a sun or a neutron star or a black hole, it doesn't change anything. People really don't need to be focusing so much on the outside when they should really be focusing within.
mr_sir: if a mass had life on it, it wouldn't change its classification. The presence of life doesn't change whether a planetary body is a planet or a moon; if humans develop cities on the moon like in several science fiction books/shows/movies, that won't make the moon a planet. The guidelines are based on the physical make-up of the "rock" itself. To draw from Star Wars, both Yavin IV and Endor were teeming with life, but they were still just moons, but then that's science
fiction after all and can just as easily be wrong. But I just don't see astrologists calling a moon a planet just because there's life on it.