Bolivia says Plants have Human Rights

[ChupathingyX]

Yeah it sounds stupid the way they put it, but basically they're trying to protect the planet. I mean south America has some really (if not the best) rainforests in the world and if they go they;re not coming back.

 

[Jonluw]

That's incredibly stupid. Every living organism that's higher up on the food chain than producers rely on the deaths of plants to sustain their life.

There's no getting around killing plants. It's practically what they're there for.

Edit: Also, I guess 'clean air' for a plant would be CO[sub]2[/sub] saturated?

Are you purposely taking it out of context, or are you just thick?

That depends... By "right to a lifecycle" did you mean the right not be killed by anyone else?

 

[steeple]

plants have rights? next thing they'll want to vote!

OT: yeah I guess it kinda makes sense...
Im against the "right to not have cellular structure modified or genetically altered", since changing the d.n.a of plants is necessery to increase not onlu our farming output, but also our knowledge about life and even our understanding of diseases...

 

[IzisviAziria]

That's incredibly stupid. Every living organism that's higher up on the food chain than producers rely on the deaths of plants to sustain their life.

There's no getting around killing plants. It's practically what they're there for.

Edit: Also, I guess 'clean air' for a plant would be CO[sub]2[/sub] saturated?

Are you purposely taking it out of context, or are you just thick?

That depends... By "right to a lifecycle" did you mean the right not be killed by anyone else?

I think it's pretty obvious that it's not intended to keep people from eating plants. Nor to keep animals from eating plants. It's intended to keep industry from destroying their ecosystem. And I can promise you, that getting killed by industry is not, practically or otherwise, what plants are there for.

 

[Titan Buttons]

This is a very interesting concept and has meret to be implemented

Just like diapers for peoples mouths. Some people might just shut up because of a dirty mouth.

Just cos I think it has mere doesn't mean I believe it outweighs the cons of such an extreme concept implemented

 

[Jonluw]

That's incredibly stupid. Every living organism that's higher up on the food chain than producers rely on the deaths of plants to sustain their life.

There's no getting around killing plants. It's practically what they're there for.

Edit: Also, I guess 'clean air' for a plant would be CO[sub]2[/sub] saturated?

Are you purposely taking it out of context, or are you just thick?

That depends... By "right to a lifecycle" did you mean the right not be killed by anyone else?

I think it's pretty obvious that it's not intended to keep people from eating plants. Nor to keep animals from eating plants. It's intended to keep industry from destroying their ecosystem. And I can promise you, that getting killed by industry is not, practically or otherwise, what plants are there for.

Well, the right not to have their ecosystems ruined by heavy industry is pretty different from an undisputable right to a lifecycle.

The way you phrase it, it sounds like Bolivia wants to make the killing of plants illegal.

 

[IzisviAziria]

Well, the right not to have their ecosystems ruined by heavy industry is pretty different from an undisputable right to a lifecycle.

The way you phrase it, it sounds like Bolivia wants to make the killing of plants illegal.

I'm not really phrasing it much differently than they did. And in that way, I would agree that there are some serious flaws with it. As I said, it's a novel idea, but implementation for such a thing is going to be nearly impossible. If anything at all is taken from this, I hope it's something of a mindset shift; away from viewing the world as a bunch of resources to be consumed, and instead viewing it as our home which needs to be treated responsibly.

 

[Jonluw]

Well, the right not to have their ecosystems ruined by heavy industry is pretty different from an undisputable right to a lifecycle.

The way you phrase it, it sounds like Bolivia wants to make the killing of plants illegal.

I'm not really phrasing it much differently than they did. And in that way, I would agree that there are some serious flaws with it. As I said, it's a novel idea, but implementation for such a thing is going to be nearly impossible. If anything at all is taken from this, I hope it's something of a mindset shift; away from viewing the world as a bunch of resources to be consumed, and instead viewing it as our home which needs to be treated responsibly.

It's hard to live here without consuming resources though.
Ideally, we'd find some way to sustain our population without harming the environment, but as of right now I don't think that's possible.

 

[Gottesstrafe]

Good intentions aside, I hope the law is well thought out.

If you decide to skip the link, basically, Bolivia is passing a law which essentially grants Mother Earth the same basic rights most humans still don't have: the right to life. They're granting plants the right to a lifecycle, the right to clean air and water, the right to not be genetically modified at a cellular level.

Curious, if there's a houseplant in the home of a frequent smoker, is the smoker in question filed a restraining order from said houseplant or do the authorities forcibly remove the plant from the smoker's premises? The foster system can be tough for a young houseplant with no one to turn to. They tend to follow the wrong crowd...

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

So it's against GM crops to help people? I'm sorry, but that's fucking retarded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice

 

[Socks and Shoes]

So if I was Bolivian, would I go to prison for burning dead grass and leaves on my lawn?

This makes no sense.

 

[IzisviAziria]

Well, the right not to have their ecosystems ruined by heavy industry is pretty different from an undisputable right to a lifecycle.

The way you phrase it, it sounds like Bolivia wants to make the killing of plants illegal.

I'm not really phrasing it much differently than they did. And in that way, I would agree that there are some serious flaws with it. As I said, it's a novel idea, but implementation for such a thing is going to be nearly impossible. If anything at all is taken from this, I hope it's something of a mindset shift; away from viewing the world as a bunch of resources to be consumed, and instead viewing it as our home which needs to be treated responsibly.

It's hard to live here without consuming resources though.
Ideally, we'd find some way to sustain our population without harming the environment, but as of right now I don't think that's possible.

I agree, as of right now, it's not possible. Does that mean we shouldn't do anything about it though? Just ignore it until someone figures it out? I should think not. So, until we get it right, we have some well-intended, if entirely impractical laws like this sprouting up.

 

[Jonluw]

Well, the right not to have their ecosystems ruined by heavy industry is pretty different from an undisputable right to a lifecycle.

The way you phrase it, it sounds like Bolivia wants to make the killing of plants illegal.

I'm not really phrasing it much differently than they did. And in that way, I would agree that there are some serious flaws with it. As I said, it's a novel idea, but implementation for such a thing is going to be nearly impossible. If anything at all is taken from this, I hope it's something of a mindset shift; away from viewing the world as a bunch of resources to be consumed, and instead viewing it as our home which needs to be treated responsibly.

It's hard to live here without consuming resources though.
Ideally, we'd find some way to sustain our population without harming the environment, but as of right now I don't think that's possible.

I agree, as of right now, it's not possible. Does that mean we shouldn't do anything about it though? Just ignore it until someone figures it out? I should think not. So, until we get it right, we have some well-intended, if entirely impractical laws like this sprouting up.

Yes, but in contrast to the Bolivian government, I think genetic modification can be part of the solution rather than the problem, so long as it's well supervised and planned out and everything.

 

[IzisviAziria]

OP

You try to open up a debate, but you do so in a biased way.

Uhhh.. At no point in time did I suggest that I was impartial. I simply provided my standpoint on the debate. I didn't open up a debate to not participate in it.

Yes, but in contrast to the Bolivian government, I think genetic modification can be part of the solution rather than the problem, so long as it's well supervised and planned out and everything.

Yeah, well again, the law has it's flaws. That part of it has a lot to do specifically with Bolivian culture, less to do with environmental issues.

 

[DTWolfwood]

Title of thread needs work. first reaction is literally to burst out laughing at the thought of Plants having human rights. I don't mind them having some plant entitled rights but to call it human rights is just comical.

But to guarantee them is way over bolivia's state budget to enforce. so what this amounts to will be something progressive on paper and nothing will come of it. a nice thought but little else.

 

[babinro]

The only gripe I have with this is prevent genetic modification of plants. There are actual positives that occur as a result of such testing that I would not eliminate it.

The rest is all good.

 

[SoulSalmon]

Are lamplights actually alive though?

One COULD argue that the only reason humans are alive is because of electrical pulses... and electricity most certainly passes through lamps...

I'm obviously being a bit of a dick but I think theres an almost valid argument to say that they are, thus why not give THEM rights on par with our own?

In any case, it's a nice idea, yet probably impossible to enforce, and simply doesn't seem practical in the long run.

 

[Gigano]

Sure glad this country doesn't have any more immediate problems to think of.

Either this will be a meaningless and useless symbolic document which won't work at all, or it will work and the country will be stuck in poverty by cutting off the ability to utilize most of its natural resources properly in industrialization.

Good one, Bolivia.