I'm really uncomfortable with this for a bunch of reasons. (Starting with the way you make the rights depend on G-d. It's not self-evident anymore, so shut up about it.) I wouldn't vote for it. If you meant something inoffensive enough that I might vote for it, the proposed text doesn't tell me what it might be. The problem is that some rights can properly be reserved to citizens--voting, freedom to enter and leave the country, access to government jobs--without unfair discrimination. Other rights --relating to self-determination, or to marriage--can fairly be reserved to adults. Your proposed amendment is equally about the right to vote, the right to nondiscriminatory hiring and education, and the right not to be tortured. They're different.
Animals should not be tortured EITHER. I don't think it's exactly a matter of them having a "right" not to be tortured. I think it's more a matter of humans having an responsibility to behave ethically. But I think it's excessively creepy to put it in the Constitution that animals have no right not to be tortured.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2010-01-24 05:22 am (UTC)Animals should not be tortured EITHER. I don't think it's exactly a matter of them having a "right" not to be tortured. I think it's more a matter of humans having an responsibility to behave ethically. But I think it's excessively creepy to put it in the Constitution that animals have no right not to be tortured.