"Right To…"

For John, BLUF:  Our State Constitution says we have a "right" clean air and water, and freedom from too much noise, etc, and the General Court can seize assets to make it so.  Nothing to see; just move along.

Looking at our Constitution here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts:

Article XCVII. Article XLIX of the Amendments to the Constitution is hereby annulled and the following is adopted in place thereof: - The people shall have the right to clean air and water, freedom from excessive and unnecessary noise, and the natural, scenic, historic, and esthetic qualities of their environment; and the protection of the people in their right to the conservation, development and utilization of the agricultural, mineral, forest, water, air and other natural resources is hereby declared to be a public purpose.

The general court shall have the power to enact legislation necessary or expedient to protect such rights.

In the furtherance of the foregoing powers, the general court shall have the power to provide for the taking, upon payment of just compensation therefor, or for the acquisition by purchase or otherwise, of lands and easements or such other interests therein as may be deemed necessary to accomplish these purposes.

Lands and easements taken or acquired for such purposes shall not be used for other purposes or otherwise disposed of except by laws enacted by a two thirds vote, taken by yeas and nays, of each branch of the general court.

I always thought that "Rights" were against the Government, and not against nature.  Granted, some of this is about one group of people exploiting the environment in ways another group doesn't like, but still, the use of the term "Rights" is bothersome to me.

Regards  —  Cliff