The ideas mentioned in the article are of critical importance. As aluded to, it builds on Aldo Leopold's land ethic. Giving nature rights is the only way we are truly going to progress environmental issues. The question too often boils down to what is more important - humans or some stupid little fish. But when the question is rephrased as what is more important, the existence of an entire species or one person's ability to make a buck, things can be seen differently. I applaud Shapleigh and their efforts. Hopefully it is a precursor of things to come. I found the last paragraph of the article pretty idiotic though. Sorry if this is at all rantish, but I had to say something and I did keep it short enough.
dc On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Mike Leonard <[email protected]> wrote: > New “nature ordinances” say you can be sued for anything. See * > http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/07/19/should_nature_be_able_to_take_you_to_court/ > *<http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/07/19/should_nature_be_able_to_take_you_to_court/> > > > I have a Buddhist client who says they are prohibited from killing > anything. They are even supposed to gently catch flies in the house and > then release them unharmed outside. Well I told him that every time he > walks outside he is squishing all kinds of bugs. He looked very guilty! > With all due respect for my Buddhist friends! HA! > > So in theory if these “nature” ordinances are passed anyone could sue > anyone for just about anything even my poor Buddhist friends! I’m sure > that thought is getting the hordes of attorneys out there in a feeding > frenzy! > > Mike > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
