Canadian town officially recognizes trees as living beings with rights
Just found this article in my new feed, and it has me a little complexed, and brings up many questions, like why does a human fetus not protected with rights and recognized as a living being and yet we declare trees, and in some cases rivers according tto the article, i mean do we really need to protect trees in this matter.........
I would have hoped that Canadians would have had the common sense to protect human life first before going off into the woods and proclaiming before god and country that trees "of all things" are recognized as living beings, and have given them rights....and yet on any given day one can go into an abortion clinic and see that human fetuses do not enjoy the same rights...how is that....well that may call into question women's "my body my choice", or the convenient procedure of getting an abortion when both parties did not take the precautions before the heavy petting got carried away.... Who of all things really needed to be protected here, trees, or human fetus....and what is next i mean why not dogs, cats, i would hope some on could make a case for animals before trees or a river....or maybe i am just not up to speed on what is fashionable today....
Quebec town recognizes trees as living beings with rights | CBC News