Romans 1:22
"A bill has been filed in New York that would grant rights to the.jpg)
Great Lakes and all waterways in the state. (A similar law was enacted previously in Toledo, forcing Ohio to pass preemptive legislation.) I have no idea whether it will pass — I would certainly hope not — but it illustrates the profound anti-development/free market agendas behind the entire nature-rights movement.
First, the bill would create a very expansive definition of the rights that would be accorded to the Great Lakes and New York waterways. From A05156A (italicized for emphasis):
Think about what “free from human violations” could mean. Dams could be forced to be deconstructed. Water could be prevented from being used in irrigation. Flood control projects could be impeded. Indeed, how could water be used in any essential way under that broad definition?
The bill could materially impede industries and farms by preventing any kind of “toxic” impact on New York’s waterways, whether intentionally or inadvertently caused:
And waters would have a liberty interest in not being monetized or owned!
Imagine the disruption of normal life if waterways could not be used to make a living or be treated as property at all.
And the potential damages that could be assessed against the violators of the rights of waterways would seem to be unquantifiable and almost impossible to defend against because the bill would institute a “strict liability” legal standard.
Imagine the mischief that New York’s financially incentivized bureaucrats could do to private enterprise and the enjoyable use of New York’s waters by individuals or businesses on their own property.
Again, I assume — perhaps naïvely — that this radical bill won’t pass. But it illustrates the expansive and anti-human goals of the nature-rights movement, which is gaining steam every day around the world."
"A bill has been filed in New York that would grant rights to the
.jpg)
First, the bill would create a very expansive definition of the rights that would be accorded to the Great Lakes and New York waterways. From A05156A (italicized for emphasis):
"The Great Lakes, and the watersheds that drain into the Great Lakes and their connecting channels, as well as the watersheds and ecosystems throughout the state of New York, shall possess the unalienable and fundamental rights to exist, persist, flourish, naturally evolve, regenerate and be restored by culpable parties, free from human violations of these rights and unencumbered by legal privileges vested in property, including corporate property."
Think about what “free from human violations” could mean. Dams could be forced to be deconstructed. Water could be prevented from being used in irrigation. Flood control projects could be impeded. Indeed, how could water be used in any essential way under that broad definition?
The bill could materially impede industries and farms by preventing any kind of “toxic” impact on New York’s waterways, whether intentionally or inadvertently caused:
"Right to freedom from toxic trespass. The people of the state of New.jpg)
York, as well as the Great Lakes ecosystem, and the watersheds that drain into the Great Lakes and their connecting channels, as well as the watersheds and ecosystems throughout the state of New York, shall possess a fundamental and unalienable right to the integrity of their bodies, ecosystems and physical aspects, and to be free from toxic trespass upon or within them; therefore, the right to be free from toxic trespass shall not be violated. As used herein, the term “toxic trespass” shall mean the intentional, unwitting, involuntary or neglectful deposition of toxic or potentially toxic substances within a human or non-human body or ecosystem."
.jpg)
And waters would have a liberty interest in not being monetized or owned!
"Right to freedom from monetization. The Great Lakes and the watersheds and ecosystems throughout the state of New York shall possess the unalienable and fundamental rights not be owned,.jpg)
privatized or monetized. These rights shall include emancipation from all claims of vested property rights to the extent that such rights purport to allow the violation of the rights of the Great Lakes ecosystem, the watersheds and ecosystems throughout the state of New York, or the people of the state of New York. Prohibited monetization of the Great Lakes ecosystem shall include but not be limited to, carbon trading, natural asset companies, ecosystem services, and patenting of life forms."
.jpg)
Imagine the disruption of normal life if waterways could not be used to make a living or be treated as property at all.
And the potential damages that could be assessed against the violators of the rights of waterways would seem to be unquantifiable and almost impossible to defend against because the bill would institute a “strict liability” legal standard.
"Any person, business entity or government agency engaged in activities that violate the rights of the Great Lakes ecosystem and the watersheds and ecosystems throughout the state of New York,
regardless of the jurisdiction in which such activity takes place, shall be strictly liable for all harms and rights violations resulting from those activities. Damages shall be measured by the cost of restoring the Great Lakes ecosystem and the watersheds and ecosystems throughout the state of New York and their constituent parts at least to their status immediately before the commencement of the acts resulting in injury, and shall be paid to the state to be used exclusively and without exception for the full and complete restoration of the Great Lakes ecosystem and its constituent parts to that status."
Imagine the mischief that New York’s financially incentivized bureaucrats could do to private enterprise and the enjoyable use of New York’s waters by individuals or businesses on their own property.
Again, I assume — perhaps naïvely — that this radical bill won’t pass. But it illustrates the expansive and anti-human goals of the nature-rights movement, which is gaining steam every day around the world."
MindMatters
