Comment on Young Australians just won a human rights case against an enormous coal mineparentComments−taneq3yI'm curious how they balanced the rights of potential future humans vs. the rights of currently existing humans whose lives would be improved by the coal potentially mined here. I'm assuming the coal miner's side tried this sort of argument?−somishere3yI would suggest this is a false dichotomy and so am not sure there would be much to balance in this regard (even if it were up for consideration)−brutusborn3yThey don't, the judgement only considers harms to human rights from the project going ahead, it ignores any downside from cancelling it.
Comments
I'm curious how they balanced the rights of potential future humans vs. the rights of currently existing humans whose lives would be improved by the coal potentially mined here. I'm assuming the coal miner's side tried this sort of argument?
I would suggest this is a false dichotomy and so am not sure there would be much to balance in this regard (even if it were up for consideration)
They don't, the judgement only considers harms to human rights from the project going ahead, it ignores any downside from cancelling it.