INSANE Environmentalism: New Zealand Law Bestows ‘Human Rights’ On River – Unborn Babies? Not So Much…

18 Mar, 2017 by Sonja Bochow

Print this article Font size -16+

The Maori, a native people of New Zealand, have finally succeeded in a century’s worth of effort to assign legal human status to a part of the scenery. That’s right, the nation’s government has now declared that a river has full human status and rights from now on. This past Wednesday. the New Zealand Parliament passed a law giving the Whanganui River, a 180-mile river located on New Zealand’s North Island, human status.

Negotiations minister of the Treaty of Waitangi for New Zealand, Chris Finlayson, says the river does not belong to anyone now, anyone except itself that is. “The Crown will not own the river bed. The river will own itself. That’s a world-leading innovation for a river system.”

It appears that worldwide, people are losing the ability to reason clearly. What Finlayson calls innovation is actually just creative craziness and government goofiness. A river is not a person. A person is not a river. No matter how sacred it is considered to be by a group of people, it is still simply a river. A river cannot think or feel, it cannot vote or work. But once we look at how the river’s representation in court will be handled, we can see the real reason behind this seemingly illogical move. The “river” is conveniently set to be represented by two actual human beings, since of course it’s pretty challenging for a 180 mile river to make an appearance in a courtroom, as well as the blindingly obvious fact that the river can’t speak for itself or testify. And therein lies what is likely the reason for this nonsense. Two people, on behalf of the river, will represent it in court disputes. One will be chosen by the “river tribes” and the second picked by the New Zealand government. Oh, and also there’s the little thing of the money; the $30 million to repair the Whanganui River and $80 million to settle disputes with local tribes. Yes, now there will be two people making decisions for the river and other people getting some big money. It’s easy to see why they wanted this. Unquestioned, unimpeded legal influence to push through their agenda in court, disguised as being on behalf of the river and bonus, a big pot of cash.

The radical environmental movement worldwide is dangerous and looking to co-opt a river, mountain or forest anywhere they can. Land is power, especially to those appointed to “represent” it. This entire move is likely less about nature and more about human nature; the desire to control others and take their money. All for a “good” cause of course.

So, a river is protected and represented legally. But unborn children? Nope. Abortion is legal in New Zealand for far too many reasons. Babies in the womb are not protected or represented legally. They are at the mercy of adults who far too often show none. Babies; not legally people. River; a legal person.

Wonder what happens when someone drowns in the river, can it be tried for murder?