Skip to comments.U.N. Prepares to Debate Whether 'Mother Earth' Deserves Human Rights Status
Posted on 04/18/2011 10:40:47 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
U.N. Prepares to Debate Whether 'Mother Earth' Deserves Human Rights Status
By Jonathan Wachtel
Published April 18, 2011 | FoxNews.com
United Nations diplomats on Wednesday will set aside pressing issues of international peace and security to devote an entire day debating the rights of Mother Earth.
A bloc of mostly socialist governments lead by Bolivia have put the issue on the General Assembly agenda to discuss the creation of a U.N. treaty that would grant the same rights found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to Mother Nature.
Treaty supporters want the establishment of legal systems to maintain balance between human rights and what they perceive as the inalienable rights of other members of the Earth community -- plants, animals, and terrain.
Communities and environmental activists would be given more legal power to monitor and control industries and development to ensure harmony between humans and nature. Though the United States and other Western governments are supportive of sustainable development, some see the upcoming event, Harmony with Nature, as political grandstanding -- an attempt to blame environmental degradation and climate change on capitalism.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
According to the UN, the PLANET EARTH deserves 'human rights' status.
But, according to that same UN, WOMEN do not.
Nuke the UN from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Send them the mother earth Uganda.
So, who will have standing to sue on behalf of Mother Earth?
Environuts and Third World dictators.
Poor headline in my opinion. As I posted the other day on the thread about Bolivia creating this as law, and I wrote it was probably a test for the UN as they have been working on this for a number of years.
IOW the UN has been debating this for years. I don't agree they are preparing to debate something they already have in the debate mill.
In a completely predictable twist, it’ll be those leftists who wish to advance control over everyone’s life through the climate agenda.
Al Gore of course.
Sheesh, I think I’ve had my fill of news for today. The whole world has gone mad!
The clear outcome of such an international law is not to elevate mother earth to human status, but to lower human beings so they function within oligarchies as the equivalent of wheat, concrete, oil, and lumber.
At the end of WW II the whole world was owned by basically nine countries. Now something like 130 additional countries have been created. The people of those countries unwrapped the gift of independence, not to find the freedoms they expected, but instead the famines, civil wars, and repressive governments their ancestors suffered under before colonialism. The General Assembly has become a promotion and perpetuation society for aspiring totalitarians.
HUMAN rights? An insult to the millions around the world that WORSHIP Our Mother the Earth.
I hope President Palin will give the UN everything it deserves - hopefully all in her first term.
An attempt to develop legal cause for international atrocities.
They will tolerate genocide and even omnicide for the sake of the person “Mother Earth”.
Mother Earth=Social Justice?
Earth worship is one thing, common sense is another.
The twilight zone Obama and our freaking media want; in which the ultimate goal will be China in charge global communism; is plain as day in four languages.
So Japan can sue Mother Earth for the tsunami?
If she’s “equal” then the answer is “yes”.
I think what the lawyers at the UN really want is to sue on behalf of Mother Earth. But even though Mother Earth was hurt, you can make the check out to the lawyers representing her.
(Meanwhile the middle east is burning, Iran and North Korea are arming, Venezuela is threatening its neighbors......)
Mossberg will have the veto.
The chance of China coming under fire from eco-nuts is???
BTW, was there any comment from Mother Earth??
Proposal by President Evo Morales Ayma of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, made to the General Assembly of the United Nations on 22 April 2009, the first International Mother Earth Day.
1. The right to life This means the right to exist, the right of every ecosystem, animal or vegetable species, snow-capped mountain, river or lake not to be eliminated or exterminated by irresponsible behaviour on the part of human beings. We humans must acknowledge that Mother Earth and other living beings also have the right to exist and that our rights end where we begin to cause the extinction or destruction of nature.
2. The right to the regeneration of biocapacity Mother Earth must be able to regenerate her biodiversity; neither human activity on planet Earth nor Earths resources are infinite. Development cannot be open-ended, there is a limit and that limit is the ability of the animal, vegetable and forest species, of water sources, of the very atmosphere to regenerate. If we human beings consume and, even worse, waste more than Mother Earth is capable of replacing or recreating then we are slowly killing our home, little by little we are choking our planet, all living beings and ourselves.
3. The right to a clean life Means the right of Mother Earth to a life free from pollution, because not only we humans have the right to live well, but also rivers, fish, animals, trees and the Earth itself have the right to live in a healthy environment, free from poison and pollution.
4. The right to harmony and balance with everyone and among everyone Mother Earth has a right to be recognized as a part of a system in which all living creatures are interdependent. This implies the right to live in harmony with human beings. There are millions of living species on the planet, but only we human beings have the awareness and ability to take command of our own destiny in order to promote harmony with nature.
But wait, there's more:
46. In recent years there has been a paradigm shift in rights. Numerous subjects who heretofore had no guaranteed rights now enjoy such rights. Similarly, inanimate beings have been endowed with rights because it was felt that they needed to be protected to the extent that they were of concern to human beings. There appears to be a conceptual change in the history of human rights. 30 Some outlooks are undergoing change in the face of evidence, including scientific evidence, with the idea that human beings have a symbiotic relationship with nature, gaining currency. 47. This is not something that has only just been realized. In 1949, with the advent of international human rights law, Aldo Leopold proposed a Land Ethic, arguing that the individual is part of a community and that this community is a Whole. His proposal sought to change human behaviour from that of conqueror of the land to a citizen of it, implying respect for the other beings that are part of that natural community. 31 In 1969, James Lovelock proposed the Gaia Hypothesis, which considered the Earth as a single organism in which all parts, including human beings, are almost as closely interrelated and as interdependent as the cells of the human body. 32 Similarly, the deep ecology movement, which has been promoted by Arne Naess since 1973, states that all human beings are constituent parts of one single natural system and are therefore interdependent with the other components. Thus, all natural things have the right to exist, regardless of their capacity for selfdetermination. 33 Deep ecology promotes a new integrating vision of the universe as a network of relations. 34 What is called spiritual ecology also proposes a closer relationship between nature and mankind. 35
Read the whole thing if you have the stomach...
Thanks for a very interesting post.
When I read the book, D’Souza’s take on Obama’s rage as “anti-neo -colonialist” seemed outdated. Not that I disagreed with D’Souza, but hadn’t heard the word “neo-colonialist” since the late 1950’s . So, what does neo-colonialism it have to do with left-wing politics in 2011?
The narrative in your posted article your narrative was a great insight into the left’s “mother earth” mysticism. It reminded me of the story line in the movie “Avatar”, with murderous Capitalist land rapers debauching nature and all its children. In the end, with the help of a few funky dude activists, the colonized are saved from the land rapers.
My curiosity was aroused enough to Google “Evo Morales”. The Wilkipedia bio reads like a history of Bolivia since the 1990’s. The old tin mines are declining, but Bolivia has the largest oil and gas reserves in Latin America after Venezuela. But countries that would like to develop these reserves have been frustrated by Bolivian politics. There is the usual conflict between the privilaged white upper class minority and the largely tribal Indian masses whose grievances have been exploited by leftist politicians.
In 2006 Evo Morales signed a decree stating that all Bolivian gas reserves were to be nationalized , and has pushed to renegotiate all contracts. This comes on top of a previous law which forces companies to negotiate with leaders of indigenous people who inhabit land with oil & deposits.
The resulting uncertainty has caused U.S. companies to lose interest in buiding any facilities in Bolivia. Brazil’s Petrobras, is even less happy, because it already owns 14% of Bolivia’s gas reserves, but in negotiations with Bolivia’s Energy Minister it refused to budge on costs and other terms. So what did Morales do after talks failed? He fired the energy minister and acquiesced to Petrobras. AS Morales put it, “We are obligated to live with Brazil in a marriage without divorce, because we both need each other”
Cut to the U.S. With Oil prices going out of sight and the Western World increasingly dependent on the unstable Midlle East, Obama’s EPA is squashing efforts by domestic oil companies to develop our reserves. And at Obama’s insistence, the moratorium on offshore drilling is ongoing. Weird , isn’t it?
Not according to Obama’s universe. There, American industry is the neo-colonialist (or in Bolivian terms, the evil white overlords), which has raped the land and must be stopped . Obama is Morales, and Morales is Obama.
Does that exclude every swinging drill string from tapping into mother earth? Is there anyone that Obama finds worthy of poking around in our waters? Well there is, because Brazil’s Petrobras just happens to be Obama’s activist dude hero on a white horse (Soros is there to get a little on the side). So there, all you, you neo-colonialists! Go take a cold shower or slam a window on it!
There is a reason why, in the entire history of man, a country based on our beliefs did not exist until 230+ years ago. And why Franklin said we had a Republic if we could keep it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.