The Breaking Views blog is administered by the New Zealand Centre for Political Research at NZCPR.com. The views expressed are those of the author alone.
Bill Maher taking the mickey about New Zealand giving Mt Taranaki personhood
Click to view
11 comments:
Janine
said...
This whole indigenous thing is cringeworthy. Shame on supposedly intelligent people agreeing to this. All 120 of them...and their followers. Typical of New Zealand now though. We need to be the wokest, the most climate conscious, the most pro LGBTQ and of course the most pro-indigenous. Who are they trying to impress? Why aren't we celebrating the most enlightened, most innovative and most inclusive people in our society?
Exactly, thank you Bill. The only thing I don't like about the preferred pronoun gag is I didn't think of it. The whole personhood thing is a joke; a joke which we are living in. Come on, Mr Luxon, you need to sort this out.
Only people complaining are monologist who don't even know the history or knowledge of where their feet stand, and forward that ignorants and stupidity white wash
This is animism -that inanimate objects can have a spirit - a life force . This is being taught in our science curriculum as well . Somehow Christianity as an alternative to this for a religion is looking better every day. We invited this nonsense in by way of the propaganda of Enlightenment, cancelling out Christianity , which believes only people have a spirit. .
The whole concept of bestowing natural phenomena with the same legal rights as people is based on a pagan belief system akin to voodoo and superstitious nonsense. New Zealand deserves all the mockery which is served out on the international stage. The NZ legal system is apparently infested with medieval thinkers, and it will take another "Inquisition" to weed out the sorcerers and practitioners of this witchcraft.
To put this issue fully in perspective, it should be noted that there is a growing momentum for natural entities such as rivers and land ecosystems to be granted legal personhood mainly in the sense of having right to be protected and looked after. Countries where we find legislation to this effect include India, Ecuador, Bolivia and Columbia.
It might put the superstitious nonsense into perspective Barend (the perspective being primitive mythology, and little else) but that doesn't make it sensible, logical or having any semblance of rational thinking nearly 200 000 years after humanoid primates got down from trees in Africa. Let's not get too accommodating and dewy-eyed about the Stone Age and start worrying about how little some human populations and cultures have evolved. The sort of anti-scientific teachings proposed for NZ school curricula is strong evidence for similar anachronistic thinking.
Allen, while indigenous ideas about the natural environment do feature in some of the rationales for this legislation, there is also the notion of a duty of care towards the natural environment. A duty of care already exists in international law in the case of freshwater bodies where the water crosses national boundaries. Personally, I don't think it's a bad idea to enforce a duty of care towards natural environmental entities, although I think that can be done without awarding them legal personhood.
New Zealand is now reaping the consequences of the misguided appeasement strategy adopted by successive governments when dealing with the g...
Welcome to Breaking Views
Breaking Views brings you expert commentary on topical political and policy issues. The views expressed are those of the author alone. The blog is administered by the New Zealand Centre for Political Research, an independent public policy think tank at NZCPR.com - register for the free weekly NZCPR newsletterHERE.
11 comments:
This whole indigenous thing is cringeworthy. Shame on supposedly intelligent people agreeing to this. All 120 of them...and their followers. Typical of New Zealand now though. We need to be the wokest, the most climate conscious, the most pro LGBTQ and of course the most pro-indigenous. Who are they trying to impress? Why aren't we celebrating the most enlightened, most innovative and most inclusive people in our society?
Exactly, thank you Bill. The only thing I don't like about the preferred pronoun gag is I didn't think of it. The whole personhood thing is a joke; a joke which we are living in. Come on, Mr Luxon, you need to sort this out.
Only people complaining are monologist who don't even know the history or knowledge of where their feet stand, and forward that ignorants and stupidity white wash
This is animism -that inanimate objects can have a spirit - a life force .
This is being taught in our science curriculum as well .
Somehow Christianity as an alternative to this for a religion is looking better every day.
We invited this nonsense in by way of the propaganda of Enlightenment, cancelling out Christianity , which believes only people have a spirit. .
The whole concept of bestowing natural phenomena with the same legal rights as people is based on a pagan belief system akin to voodoo and superstitious nonsense.
New Zealand deserves all the mockery which is served out on the international stage.
The NZ legal system is apparently infested with medieval thinkers, and it will take another "Inquisition" to weed out the sorcerers and practitioners of this witchcraft.
To put this issue fully in perspective, it should be noted that there is a growing momentum for natural entities such as rivers and land ecosystems to be granted legal personhood mainly in the sense of having right to be protected and looked after. Countries where we find legislation to this effect include India, Ecuador, Bolivia and Columbia.
Incomprehensible racist drivel.
It might put the superstitious nonsense into perspective Barend (the perspective being primitive mythology, and little else) but that doesn't make it sensible, logical or having any semblance of rational thinking nearly 200 000 years after humanoid primates got down from trees in Africa. Let's not get too accommodating and dewy-eyed about the Stone Age and start worrying about how little some human populations and cultures have evolved. The sort of anti-scientific teachings proposed for NZ school curricula is strong evidence for similar anachronistic thinking.
Allen, while indigenous ideas about the natural environment do feature in some of the rationales for this legislation, there is also the notion of a duty of care towards the natural environment. A duty of care already exists in international law in the case of freshwater bodies where the water crosses national boundaries. Personally, I don't think it's a bad idea to enforce a duty of care towards natural environmental entities, although I think that can be done without awarding them legal personhood.
Fine, but let's not add New Zealand to the list.
Too late, Barrie, The court in India cited the Wanganui River as a precedent.
Post a Comment