‘Plant Rights’: The Silent Scream of the Asparagus
Sunday, May 4, 2008 • 8:51 am
The great thing about
this story is that people like me get to chuckle at all those folks who figure that when it comes to "the way things ought to be done," the Europeans know best, and the Swiss know especially best. The bad thing about this story is that because the Swiss have done it, it makes it more likely that one day, it'll be done here. One things is fore sure, as much as the sun rises in the east: Katharine Jefferts Schori will soon be citing this as validation of her spork-carrying, anti-cow-flatulence brand of eco-nuttiness:
At the request of the Swiss government, an ethics panel has weighed in on the "dignity" of plants and opined that the arbitrary killing of flora is morally wrong. This is no hoax. The concept of what could be called "plant rights" is being seriously debated.
A few years ago the Swiss added to their national constitution a provision requiring "account to be taken of the dignity of creation when handling animals, plants and other organisms." No one knew exactly what it meant, so they asked the Swiss Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology to figure it out. The resulting report, "The Dignity of Living Beings with Regard to Plants," is enough to short circuit the brain.
A "clear majority" of the panel adopted what it called a "biocentric" moral view, meaning that "living organisms should be considered morally for their own sake because they are alive." Thus, the panel determined that we cannot claim "absolute ownership" over plants and, moreover, that "individual plants have an inherent worth." This means that "we may not use them just as we please, even if the plant community is not in danger, or if our actions do not endanger the species, or if we are not acting arbitrarily."
No word yet on whether, with a salad being the equivalent of a Holocaust, the Swiss are going to reconsider the morality of killing unborn children.
Comments:
Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere about the crisis in our church. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see
this post for more. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments that you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm, its board of directors, or its site administrators.
I am surprised that they still use the term “creation” - as this assumes a creator.
But I assume they mean a personified cosmic accident or something.
Unbuntu!