The right to life is for fungi, but not for unborn humans.

The "natural rights" model is becoming very important in the progressive circle, and is even proposed to join the constitution of the California left wing and call for the new Constitutional Convention (Cal Con Con) to amend the current charter. This is their board.

Whenever I put forward this impetus to "nature", whether in articles or in speeches, someone will ask whether these radicals also give unborn people the same "right to survive, maintain, maintain and regenerate their life cycles" - a typical language O. Natural rights proposals - because they advocate fungi, viruses, rivers, wolves and forests, all of which will be enforceable under the "natural rights" proposal.

"What do you think of it?" "I always answer in a rhetorical way.

Now, an article on Mother Jones's "natural rights" contained in the constitution is published in Rowan Walwrath's article:

Cal-Con Con 2 contains a proposal: "the ability to terminate life's self-renewal is illegal." When I pointed out that this could be explained as a ban on abortion, [Claire] htin [the founder of the California constitutional convention organization] was shocked. She said that Cal Con Con is pro choice, so language must be changed.

You have it, a right to life, a fungus, but not an unborn baby.

Do not expect logic or consistency from natural rights activists. They bake their crazy plans with pure emotional flour and ferment cakes with a bunch of anti humanitarianism.

Related Products

SQL Error: select * from ***_ecms_ where classid=0 and ispic=1 and (title like '%canned mushroom%' or title like '% china canned mushroom%' or title like '% mushroom supplier%') order by newstime desc limit 10