Bolivia enshrines natural world's rights

[Thumpalumpacus]

Wanting to live ≠ the right to live.

Were life a natural right, there would be no death, except that because of that, animals would starve. Ergo, we have arrived at a contradiction, meaning that one of your premises is incorrect.

[MrJonno]

Wanting to live ≠ the right to live.

Were life a natural right, there would be no death, except that because of that, animals would starve. Ergo, we have arrived at a contradiction, meaning that one of your premises is incorrect.

Its a desperate search for someone who probablty doesnt believe in god wanting some sort of other moral absolute, what is with people who just can't accept many if not all moral decisiosn in life can be complex and as species we learn and do our best

[egbert]

There are actually ethical and scientific issues in making entire organisms extinct even if they are nasty diseases. I believe copies of smallpox are kept just for this reason

I think they're kept in case of a resurgence, to assist in developing countermeasures.
Of course, there's the biological warfare motive too. The psychopaths who rule us must have their toys.

[egbert]

And if you ask any sentient organism whether they have a "right to life" they will inevitably answer in the affirmative.

OK, I'm trying to think of a sentient organism (besides man) that could answer in the affirmative. DUH!

Even lower organisms will engage in defensive behavior to defend their right to life.

So you can't figure out the difference between "Right to Life" and "Will to live"?

[egbert]

And how about the malaria bacteria? It's been all but eradicated from the US, and it was an endemic disease back before DDT in the South.

Malaria is not endangered.

Stop confusing Seth with facts.....

See the little red dot in what appears to be Georgia? That's the US population segment of the malaria organism. It used to cover most of the south, clear up to Washington, D.C. and beyond. It's habitat and species reach has been severely reduced and it's in danger of complete extirpation and extinction in its US population segment, which makes it eligible for protection under the Endangered Species Act, no matter how much of it is available elsewhere.

The same thing applies to wolves. There are plenty of wolves in Canada and Alaska, but they are protected in parts of the lower 48 because they are "distinct population segments." The same rules apply to malaria organisms as apply to wolves.

The same rules apply to malaria organisms as apply to wolves.
The same rules apply to malaria organisms as apply to wolves.
The same rules apply to malaria organisms as apply to wolves.

What are you on - the same drugs as Rush Limbaugh?



Show us ANY countries endangered species list with "malaria" on it!

[.Morticia.]

This reminds me of the fracas a few years back from PETA and Sea Kittens.

And I totally agreed with them.

As humans we have a tendency to identify with the soft and cuddly and the animals that have faces we can anthropomorphise.

There aren't many people who thinks crocs have rights, or that spiders have rights.

What about trees, do they have rights?

Most importantly, do humans have rights?

We might be wrecking this place but hell, there's lots of animals and plants that wreck/shape the environment to their own benefit and the detriment of other species.

Do we have a lesser right to live as human animals as other species have a right to live as they do?



In the end will it really matter anyway, a few million years from now we won't even exist as a species. All traces of us and our empires will be practically gone.

Sharks and crocs prolly won't have changed at all and Seth will still be blaming the unions.

[Seth]

Show us ANY countries endangered species list with "malaria" on it!

Show me in the Endangered Species Act where the species that causes malaria is exempt from the law.

[Seth]

Rights as a natural function of life? Where will the victims of these last 10 years' earthquakes and tsunamis take Nature to court for violating their basic rights?

Just because you cannot defend your rights against a natural disaster or disease doesn't mean you don't have the rights.

Just because I may die of cancer doesn't mean I don't have a right to life. If I have no right to life that it inherent to me as a function of my humanity, then whatever organization or group decides who has what rights may take my life if it decides I don't meet their criteria for having a right to life.

I don't know about you, but I find it unacceptable that my rights might be "granted" to me at the whims and caprices of whatever culture I happen to reside in. That's how women get stoned to death for adultery in barbaric Islamic cultures. Are you arguing that those women don't have a right to life, and that it is justifiable for Islamic authorities in Islamic countries, who make the determination who enjoys what rights, to stone women to death?

You really aren't thinking very deeply about this subject, you know.

[Svartalf]

Show us ANY countries endangered species list with "malaria" on it!

Show me in the Endangered Species Act where the species that causes malaria is exempt from the law.

the fact that no such list has ever included unicellular organisms?
the fact that germs for diseases have never left the "pests to be eradicated at all costs" lists?

[Svartalf]

Rights as a natural function of life? Where will the victims of these last 10 years' earthquakes and tsunamis take Nature to court for violating their basic rights?

Just because you cannot defend your rights against a natural disaster or disease doesn't mean you don't have the rights.

Just because I may die of cancer doesn't mean I don't have a right to life. If I have no right to life that it inherent to me as a function of my humanity, then whatever organization or group decides who has what rights may take my life if it decides I don't meet their criteria for having a right to life.

I don't know about you, but I find it unacceptable that my rights might be "granted" to me at the whims and caprices of whatever culture I happen to reside in. That's how women get stoned to death for adultery in barbaric Islamic cultures. Are you arguing that those women don't have a right to life, and that it is justifiable for Islamic authorities in Islamic countries, who make the determination who enjoys what rights, to stone women to death?

You really aren't thinking very deeply about this subject, you know.

you seem to be sadly mistaken about what a right is.

a possibility is something that can happen/be done. living a happy life in your home, or having that life/home destroyed by natural catastropher are both possibilities.

a right is something you can get protection, generally by law, against it being infringed. It's something you can get enforced.

There's no right when both parties in a dispute, like that bear that wants to eat you for lunch and whose skin you want to use for a rug have equal justification to their actions. You don't speak of rights about predators trying to eat animals, or prey trying to evade them.
More importantly, there is no right in the absence of other people to agree that your actions are right (or not). Rights exist only within the framework of human society, and the concept of natural rights has sense only within the frame of how much society can or should infringe on the prerogatives of individuals.

[MrJonno]

Just because I may die of cancer doesn't mean I don't have a right to life. If I have no right to life that it inherent to me as a function of my humanity, then whatever organization or group decides who has what rights may take my life if it decides I don't meet their criteria for having a right to life.

Thats pretty much how the world works, rights are pure legal construct if the legal system changes or no longer exists there go your rights

[MrJonno]

I don't know about you, but I find it unacceptable that my rights might be "granted" to me at the whims and caprices of whatever culture I happen to reside in.

Well I find it unacceptable that I'm going to die, will never be rich and will never get to shag Uma Thurman but thats still the way the world is. The ' this is unacceptable' is the entire basis of religion including the libertarian one

[egbert]

Show us ANY countries endangered species list with "malaria" on it!

Show me in the Endangered Species Act where the species that causes malaria is exempt from the law.

Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the government protects endangered and threatened plants and animals (listed species) and the habitats upon which they depend

http://www.epa.gov/espp/

See that genius - it says "listed species". The EPA applies to LISTED SPECIES. DUH!

Why don't you ask your Ward Attendant if the Institution offers a Reading Comprehension course? Maybe they'll let you bring Rush Limbaugh.

[laklak]

Well I find it unacceptable that I'm going to die, will never be rich and will never get to shag Uma Thurman but thats still the way the world is. The ' this is unacceptable' is the entire basis of religion including the libertarian one

How do you know that? Chin up old boy. Pretty soon they'll come up with a method of repairing damaged DNA and some stem-cell based rejuvenation therapy thing and by the time you're old it will be available in 7-11s. Won't come from the U.S. of course, can't have people messing about with bits and bobs from poor little aborted babies, By God, but those Godless Chinks will do it in their slave-labor research facilities - but I digress. Then you'll be able to spend literal lifetimes in the pursuit of wealth. Eventually (unless you're spectacularly stupid) you'll be rich. Then you can track down Uma (who will still look like she did in Pulp Fiction), woo her with your boyish charm (honed to perfection over several lifetimes) and shag her fucking broken.

I'm optimistic.

[egbert]

I've long been thinking about filing an Endangered Species Act lawsuit against the government for it's H. Pestis and Smallpox eradication efforts...

Careful - those Black Helicopters and BTAF agents will come for you....