Wisconsin

A few months ago, I posted about a Republican-sponsored bill in Wisconsin that would preempt local communities from enacting “nature rights” ordinances. I wrote at the time: If the bill passes, I suspect that the Democrat governor will veto it. Nature rights was adopted into the platform of Florida’s Democratic Party, and I predict it will eventually become a plank of the national party as it is becoming a zealous progressive cause as a means of combatting climate change and hobbling capitalism. But at least a veto would be clarifying. Later, Wisconsin Democrat legislators heightened my expectation by filing a resolution in support of granting nature “inherent rights, including the right to exist, flourish, regenerate, and be restored.” The Republican Read More ›

A few months ago, I posted about a Republican proposal in Wisconsin to have the state legally preempt local ordinances that grant “rights” to nature. I predicted that, if the bill passed, the Democratic governor would veto it because the nature rights movement is quickly entering the progressive mainstream. Well, no veto yet, since the bill hasn’t passed. But some Democratic legislators have reacted against the legislation by proposing a joint resolution in favor of granting “inherent rights to nature.” Par for the course, they bow to the supposedly superior environmental wisdom of indigenous people. From the proposed joint resolution: Whereas, Indigenous communities…have lived in respectful relationships with the land that is now Wisconsin for thousands of years, and their Read More ›

The following article was originally published at Badger Institute by Mark Lisheron. Lisheron describes the current battle for and against nature rights, specifically in the United States, and quotes Senior Fellow and Chair of the Center on Human Exceptionalism, Wesley J. Smith. If a tree falls in the forest, can it sue for physical, mental and emotional harm? Not in Wisconsin, and two state lawmakers want to make sure the door isn’t opened to the possibility. State Rep. Joy Goeben (R-Hobar) and state Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) have introduced a bill that “prohibits a city, village, town, or country” from enacting a “rights of nature ordinance” that confers “legal rights to a natural resource to exist, to be protected against Read More ›

The nature rights movement’s greatest strength isn’t its crackers ideology — i.e., geological features are living persons with the right to “exist, persist, maintain and regenerate its vital cycles, structure, functions and its processes in evolution,” and rivers have the “right to flow.” Rather, it is the lack of seriousness with which the movement is taken by expected opponents precisely because it is so crackers. That eye rolling condescension has allowed activists to further their cause almost unimpeded to the point nature rights is the law of several countries and under serious consideration for implementation at the highest level of international governance. Nature rights advocacy is now being funded by the National Geographic Society and its unscientific ideology has been Read More ›