"Treaty supporters want the establishment of legal systems to maintain balance between human rights and what they perceive as the inalienable rights of other members of the Earth community -- plants, animals, and terrain.
Communities and environmental activists would be given more legal power to monitor and control industries and development to ensure harmony between humans and nature. Though the United States and other Western governments are supportive of sustainable development, some see the upcoming event, “Harmony with Nature,” as political grandstanding -- an attempt to blame environmental degradation and climate change on capitalism.
“The concept ‘Mother Earth’ is not universally accepted,” said a spokesman from the British Mission to the U.N. about Bolivia’s proposal. “In general, our view is that we should focus on tackling important sustainable development issues through existing channels and processes.”
The General Assembly two years ago passed a Bolivia-led resolution proclaiming April 22 as “International Mother Earth Day.” The measure was endorsed by all 192 member states. But Bolivian President Evo Morales envisioned much more, vowing in a speech to U.N. delegates that a global movement had begun to lay “out a Declaration on the Rights of Mother Earth.”
Morales, who repeatedly says “the central enemy of Mother Earth is capitalism,” called for creating a charter that defends the right to life for all living things. Morales, who was named World Hero of Mother Earth by the General Assembly, has since made great strides in his campaign.
In January, Bolivia became the world’s first nation to grant the natural environment equal rights to humans. Bolivia’s Law of Mother Earth is heavily influenced by the spiritual indigenous Andean world outlook that revolves around the earth deity Pachamama, roughly translated to Mother Earth..."
GAIA, Deep Ecology, Ecosophy and whatever nonsense you care to name it are the logical result of the spiritual vacuum that originated in the West's rejection of Christendom. No one of the "great" thinkers of these fake pseudoreligions, because that is what they are, apparently ever came so far, in their 'intellectual' demarches, to notice that the world's NGO's bothered with blind people on Manaus' streets, polio in West Africa, extreme poverty in Calcutta or bilharziosis victims in Egypt.... practically all come from Christian nations... or nations that once were Christian.
In their eyes christianity was always a tool for oppression, and a ludicrous explanation for the wonders of the Universe. So they saw fit to discard it, judging it superfluous in this 'glorious' new world.
But Man is in his essence a Religious Being. Earlier this week I talked about this issue - a.o. - to the priest in my village, who recalled many conversations with ardent atheists (the worst among them Parti Socialiste hacks of course). This Priest, Father Luc D., told me that basically, human beings, a few exceptions notwithstanding, cannot live without some kind of religion. He told me of the troubles many atheists had as their age advanced.
It ensues that most people who discard their religion - and most earthlings who did so in recent decades were westerners - will inevitably look for something else to fill the void.
Now, Christianity is an anthropocentric religion par excellence - it places Man central in this world, and it entrusts him with possession of the earth - for good or for bad, we would of course be smart to rule it wisely - but that is the essence. It is US, men and women and our offspring, who are ENTITLED to this planet and must make best use of it.
Moreover, since according to christianity's Holy Book Man is made after the image of God, Christians get a profound sense of the Being Unique of Man, of his intrinsical value, of the preciousness of human life. It is precisely this worldview that has led to the typical western inclination to help wherever necessary if possible. Charity is a western concept.
Wise men such as e.g. Friedrich Hayek, who himself was an agnostic, fully understood the essentially benign nature of christendom. In his book The Fatal Conceit, Hayek writes:
"Even those among us, like myself, who are not prepared to accept the anthropomorphic conception of a personal divinity ought to admit that the premature loss of what we regard as nonfactual beliefs would have deprived mankind of a powerful support in the long development of the extended order that we now enjoy, and that even now the loss of these beliefs, whether true or false, creates great difficulties.” (Hayek, F.A., The Fatal Conceit, p. 137)
If despite this obviously Positive-Towards-Man worldview people decide to throw christianity under the bus, you'd better hope that if leaders of men who espouse the same anti-christian views replace it with something that's at least as good - for Man, that is.
As history teaches us, not even Leftists who PRETEND to care for Man - and even I am willing to acknowledge that at the basis of leftist thinking there is a kernel of earnestness in their desire to help the downtrodden of this earth...
... not even leftists have come up with something better. Quite the contrary, as massive starvation following socialist and communist experiments have so devastatingly shown in the twentieth century. This is what happens when God the Almighty becomes State the Almighty, for indeed, the God of the Left is the State. Still, in western democracies where the influence of leftism was diluted by the mere fact that they had to share power, their legislature has in many ways contributed to the well-being of many - but only because they could finance it with the milk cows of capitalism. Whether their plans can be sustained is a wholly different matter.
It becomes downright dangerous however if not even the leftist concept of compassion and how to finance it is maintained. Which is why in se, the radical green worldview is even more dangerous than the leftist worldview.
Because once your New Religion places the interests of 'Gaia' higher than those of Man, and the bozos who profess to this travesty achieve power, Man is REALLY in trouble. Luckily, greens represent thus far a smaller challenge to humanity's well-being than leftists since their numbers are less impressive. Leftists have left their trail on this planet from Marx, Engels and Hitler in Europe over Nasser in Egypt and Nyerere in Tanzania to Pol Pot in Cambodia and Kim Il Sung in North Korea. But Greens are a relatively recent phenomenon and to be encountered in force only, thus far, in Europe and North America. The fact that their worldview is so insane is another reason why it's less widespread.
But they are gaining, and the April 18 vote in the UN Assembly, orchestrated by a Bolivian quack, is proof for that. That, plus the fact that if you are a father of young children, you will doubtlessly find green insanity in your kids' schoolbooks - the indoctrination starts early.
People who would dismiss the UN vote on Earth's 'Human Rights' as a funny but otherwise harmless pastime, would do well to study the works of the fella who launched the Gaia concept: scientist, futurologist and environmentalist James Lovelock. Believe me, if you walk on two legs and can speak you're better off with good ole Christianity than with the Religion of Mother Earth, as designed by Mr Lovelock, because for him Humanity is 'an out of control cancer that Gaia will soon eradicate'.
Mr Lovelock has ardent supporters who are somewhat more specific:
"The first task is population control at home. How do we go about it? Many of my colleagues feel that some sort of compulsory birth regulation would be necessary to achieve such control. One plan often mentioned involves the addition of temporary sterilants to water supplies or staple food. Doses of the antidote would be carefully rationed by the government to produce the desired population size."
— Prof Paul Ehrlich, The Population Bomb, p.135
"If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels."
- Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, patron of the World Wildlife Fund
The Gaia concept is bogus. Earth is made up of inanimate matter. Earth is OURS, and it's our RIGHT to use it resources as befits us. We would of course be wise to do that in a smart way. But to advance the idea that humanity should lay its head on the chopping block of Green Radicalism for the benefit of the magma under our feet or the wellbeing of the nickel and iron in earth's core is BEYOND STUPID. If you feel so bad for the third rock from the sun because 6 billion plus ungrateful two leggers trample on it, you can just as well feel soooooo sorry for Jupiter hurrrrrrrrrting when Shoemaker-Levy 9 ploinks in it, as happened in 1994. Did I say Beyond Stupid?
No, it's insane.
It's not only insane, it's also inhuman.
Or, given the April 18 debate, shall we say...