Connect with us

Media

NYT endorses Gaia worship insanity and earth personhood

Published

on

It’s not a new thing for lawyers to invent ways for themselves to adopt clients for whom they are the sole decision-maker. They’ve done it for years with certain trusts, all kinds of corporations and various class-action plaintiffs, which are held by law as “legal persons.” They’ve even tried with a chimpanzee. Now the New York Times is highlighting, on its front-page, a “far-left environmental group” that has asked a judge to recognize the Colorado river as a person.

In both the chimp case and now with the river, the example of New Zealand’s Whanganui River has emerged.

Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson says Whanganui Iwi has fought for recognition of its relationship with the river since the 1870s.

The iwi recognises the river, Te Awa Tupua, as part of the living mountains and the sea.

“Te Awa Tupua will have its own legal identity with all the corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of a legal person,” Mr Finlayson said.

“The approach of granting legal personality to a river is unique.”

Mr Finlayson said the river would have the ability to represent itself through human representatives, one appointed by the iwi and one by the Crown.

The Iwi are an indigenous people in New Zealand, and granting the river legal personhood was a way to address their religious ties to the land. That would put the Deep Green Resistance group, whose lawyers filed suit in Federal District Court in Colorado Monday on a par with the indigenous people of New Zealand who worship a river.

It names the river ecosystem as the plaintiff — citing no specific physical boundaries — and seeks to hold the state of Colorado and Gov. John Hickenlooper liable for violating the river’s “right to exist, flourish, regenerate, be restored, and naturally evolve.”

The river, as such, is not alive, or conscious. The river’s “right to exist” is solely at the mercy of forces beyond its power–be that God or physics and geology. What this suit, and the NYT’s apparent endorsement of it, is alleging is that Gaia worship and earth personhood is a thing.

Corporations Have Rights. Why Not Rivers? | Julie Turkewitz, New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/26/us/does-the-colorado-river-have-rights-a-lawsuit-seeks-to-declare-it-a-person.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=1This is the essential question in what attorneys are calling a first-of-its-kind federal lawsuit, in which a Denver lawyer and a far-left environmental group are asking a judge to recognize the Colorado River as a person.

If successful, it could upend environmental law, possibly allowing the redwood forests, the Rocky Mountains or the deserts of Nevada to sue individuals, corporations and governments over resource pollution or depletion. Future lawsuits in its mold might seek to block pipelines, golf courses or housing developments and force everyone from agriculture executives to mayors to rethink how they treat the environment.

The NYT buried a church shooting that could have become a massacre but for the heroics of a 22-year-old man, on page 14, because worship of God isn’t important enough to be top news. Perhaps some church should file suit in a federal district court to have God declared a legal person. Each denomination would appoint a representative, and together they would speak for God in all matters that fall under God’s interests–that being, well, everything in the universe. I’d be happy with that, although the representatives might be corrupted by the power.

To grant a river legal personhood is along the same lines as giving God legal personhood with human representatives. What “the Colorado River wants” is nothing more than what leftist fringe environmentalists who worship the river want. And the NYT is just peachy with promoting their Gaia worship. As Wesley Smith wrote, next their editorial board will endorse nature rights, leading to human slavery to a small group who speak for the Earth.

Nature Rights Makes the NYT | Wesley J. Smith, National Review

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/451842/nature-rights-makes-nytI keep warning that the nature rights movement is a real threat to human thriving, and I keep hearing people hoot and say, “It will never happen here.” (Anyone who says that has been in a coma for the last 50 years.)

This is part of the war against human exceptionalism. If forests and swamps, insects and granite outcroppings–all aspects of nature–have rights, if rights cease to be restricted to the human realm, then all we are is another animal in the forest.

 

 

+Jesseb Shiloh is not-so-new to blogging. He enjoys things that most don't and doesn't mind and occasional nap. And he's never ambiguous nor contradictory most of the time. Find him on Twitter.

Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report.