moonbattery logo

Oct 31 2012

Human Rights for Plants

If foreign terrorists are entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention and the US Constitution, which apply only to lawful combatants and American citizens, respectively, why shouldn’t human rights be granted to plants? After PETA et al. have made meat illegal, next on the agenda will be eating any form of plant life. It won’t be a problem for liberals; they can subsist on sheer sanctimonious lunacy:

Writing in The New York Times recently, Michael Marder, author of the forthcoming Plant-Thinking: A Philosophy of Vegetal Life, calls for “plant liberation.”

Gibbers Marder,

“[T]he commendable desire to ameliorate the condition of animals, currently treated as though they were meat-generating machines, does not justify strategic argumentation in favor of the indiscriminate consumption of plants. The same logic ultimately submits to total instrumentalization the bodies of plants, animals and humans by setting them over and against an abstract and rational mind.”

Therefore, he concludes, “the struggles for the emancipation of all instrumentalized living beings should be fought on a common front.”

That is, anything that is alive gets human rights. But why stop at things that are alive?

The Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund argues that greenery does have interests — and rights. The Pennsylvania-based nonprofit works with communities around the world to “craft and adopt new laws that change the status of natural communities and ecosystems from being regarded as property under the law to being recognized as rights-bearing entities.” …

Under such a rights-based system of law, [Mari] Margil [of CELDF] says, “a river may be recognized as having the right to flow…”

However, human rights for children who have not yet passed completely out of the birth canal remain out of the question.

fetus_sucking_thumb
Weeds and rivers will get human rights, but…

On tips from J and James McEnanly. Hat tip: NewsBusters.

Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on Google+Pin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on Twitter


  • AC

    Postmodern gibberish is a symptom of mental illness.

  • grayjohn

    No sane person thinks this way. No sane person can.

  • Judith M.

    I just got done eating a plum. It was delicious.

  • Your Inner Voice

    This is actually about giving fascist intra-gov’t agencies (like the FDA, EPA, Dept of Ag, and etc.)more power over individuals and groups they target as “uncooperative” in the revolution. Like all of the hundreds of thousands of other laws on the books for eternity after they are written, they will be selectively enforced to starve those who don’t take the Mark of the Beast( http://www.therightplanet.com/2012/07/obamacare-page-1004-you-must-have-rfid-chip-implanted-in-your-body/ ) into surrendering to The New World Order, and it’s infernal director.

  • St. Gilbert

    Chesterton observed this historical truism: Where you find nature worship, there you will find human sacrifice.

  • Your Inner Voice

    Of course it also acts as a counter to the idea of individual human rights bestowed by an Almighty Creator, which hinders the advance of the Revolution, making human think more highly of themselves than they ought to do.

  • StanInTexas

    So animals need human rights? What do we do with the animals that eat other animals?

    So plants need human rights? What do we do about animals that eat plants? Or plants that eat animals?

    ?????????????????????????????????????

  • Your Inner Voice

    St. Gilbert grabs my meme before I can hit “add your reply”…

  • Son of Taz

    Stan we don’t do anything. We start building very large sanatoriums and put people who think this way in them, after evaluating them – at their expense of course.

    Using the leftist’s terminology, let’s build “re-education camps” and keep them away from civil society.

  • http://twitter.com/TheWrightWingv2 TheWrightWing

    The common denominator in all progressive ‘intellectual’ thinking?

    Humans are an abomination.

  • Ghost of FA Hayek

    Why is it that a moonbat can recognize an inherent right (whether imagined or not) for plants and animals based solely on their existance, but yours must be granted or taken by government ?

  • http://www.henrypbabcock.com Henry

    This guy is way late to the party; these kooks have been pushing this idea for 40 years.

  • Sam Adams

    Rights-bearing entities all have something in common…they all need legal representation. Lawyers all love this type of Moonbattery, especially if they can find some way for “us” to pay their legal bills.

    Personal opinion….if a river needs legal representation, let Old Man River pay for the representation he receives. Then again, if the attorneys win a suit, how will the rights-bearing entity be compensated(apart from paying his attorney 40%)???

  • Tchhht!!!

    Yep, this is what the progressive movement has degenerated into since the sixties.

  • bobdog

    And who among us speaks for the lowly e coli?

    PETA do!

  • Bob Roberts

    MOONBATS… you can’t live with them, you can’t ship them off to some desert island or tropical rainforest to sink or swim based on their true knowledge and capabilities!

    Seriously, on the one hand they say everyone has a human right to housing, even if they aren’t responsible enough to purchase, pay for and maintain a house, but on the other they suggest some new form of “natural” law that would, if you take it to it’s logical conclusion….

    ….. abolish all private ownership of property?

    Hey, I think I get where they’re going with this now.

    The communist ideal. Nobody owns anything. The government can give and take whatever it wishes as it wishes whenever it wishes.

  • Bob Roberts

    It’s wrong to use antibiotics. Do you have any idea how many living things you kill whenever you do?

    By the way, I’m going to give up using listerine.

    I just saw a commercial where it says it kills germs on contact.

    The idea of all those things dying in my mouth is gross!

  • Bob Roberts

    (Most of you know that last post was all jokes, but for those who don’t get it…)

  • 762×51

    So if we can’t eat meat and we cant eat plants what is left? It seems as though this leftist is advocating that humanity commit mass suicide.

    People like this represent a threat to humanity as a whole and as such should be rounded up and fed to the hogs who will eat anything with out concern for its rights. The hogs can then be turned into tasty BBQ and everyone wins, except the Muslims who cannot eat pork, but who cares.

  • oldguy

    We have to eat something; I guess that leaves you.

  • Your Inner Voice

    The seeking of plants and animals as constituents for the commie-lib Dem revolution is what comes of killing 55 million future constituents in the womb and encouraging the joining of opposable parts in [un]holy “matrimony”. Eventually there are no sentient humans left to fill the ranks of the aging/dying hippies, if a commie-lib hippie can be called a “sentient being”.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy