02Dec 2024 by Post

Now It’s “Whale Rights”

animal standing, anti-Western ideology, conservation, courts, Culture & Ethics, emotionalism, indigenous wisdom, industrialization, Legal Cheek, legal person, legal standing, London, Michelle Bender, national defense, nature rights, Neuroscience & Mind, Ocean Vision Legal, Pacific Whale Fund, rights, River Thames, shipping, Simmons and Simmons, whale rights, whales, windmills
As often is the case in nature rights activism, “indigenous wisdom” is invoked as somehow superior to modern conservation. Source
Read More
25Jun 2022 by Post

How Euthanasia Activists Laid the Groundwork for Overturning Roe

abortion, activists, Anti-Euthanasia Task Force, assisted suicide, common law, Constitution, courts, Culture & Ethics, Dobbs v. Jackson, Due Process Clause, euthanasia, Fourteenth Amendment, history, hubris, Law, Medicine, Patients Rights Council, Roe v. Wade, Supreme Court, Washington v. Glucksberg
Back in the ’90s, the assisted-suicide movement tried to convince the Supreme Court to impose a Roe–style decision for their cause. Source
Read More
14Apr 2022 by Post

Ecuador’s Highest Court Grants Rights to Wild Animals

animal rights, animals, bacteria, Climate News, Congress, courts, Culture & Ethics, deer, ecosystems, Ecuador, elephant, fish, forests, geological features, germs, habeas corpus, human exceptionalism, individual animals, insects, Laws, Life Sciences, nature right, New York State, plants, rivers, Switzerland, viruses, water
Nature rights apply to individual animals. And, one would assume, to be consistent, to individual plants, insects, water, and (what the hell) germs too. Source
Read More
07Nov 2020 by Post

Michael Behe: Kafka in Dover, Pennsylvania

A Mousetrap for Darwin, computational biology, courts, election, Franz Kafka, hardback, Harrisburg, Intelligent Design, Joshua Swamidass, Judge John E. Jones, Kafkaesque, Kindle, Kitzmiller v. Dover, legal claims, paperback, Pat Flynn, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, The Trial, Washington University
Behe concludes here, “Courts are not good places to discuss ideas.” Yet ID critics continue to cite the Dover case as scientific gospel. Source
Read More