IA. The Human who is destined to become tomorrow is already today to be legally recognised.

(Protective version)

Consensus omnium (Proved by universal consent):

Every Human must be granted the Right to exist tomorrow. However, the recipient of this Right is not the one who is present before me today.‍

"Do you want to protect this girl's presence tomorrow? If "yes", who do you really want to protect?"

The thought establishing the new Understanding of the Human to be protected (HL) starts with the expressed desire for another person to be here tomorrow and leads to the legal recognition of the Human to come:

A. The recognition of the Human Right to be here tomorrow (and live his/her moment of life to come).

I Want her to be here tomorrow > I recognise her Right to be here tomorrow

1: Presentation of the data:
- There is a girl in front of us today, and because this girl is alive and healthy, it is possible to expect her presence tomorrow, to expect she is here tomorrow living a moment of life.

- This is a fact.
2: Expression of Sensitivity for others:
-My question then to you is: Do you want this girl to be here tomorrow (and live her moment of life to come)?

- I certainly do! This girl has to be here tomorrow (and live her moment of life to come)!
3: Identification of a Right:
- For this purpose, so that she can be here tomorrow (and live her moment of life to come), you, therefore, propose to protect her, to legally protect her presence tomorrow?

- Of course !

- Someone is legally protected on the basis of a Right. In the name of what Right would you protect this little girl so that she can be here tomorrow (and live her moment of life to come) ?
‍
-
Quite simply: in the name of her Right to be here tomorrow (and to live her moment of life to come).
‍
- It is today that you want to protect her presence tomorrow, so it is today that you recognise her the Right to be here tomorrow?

- Of course! I recognise that today, this girl has the Right to be here tomorrow (and to live her moment of life to come).

-Β It’s obvious!
-

B. The Legal recognition of the Human to come.

I recognise her Right to be here tomorrow > I recognise the Right of the one she is destined to become to be.

4: Identification of the beneficiary of this Right:
- So I have a second question for you.

- Please.

- Who, more specifically, is the beneficiary of this Right? Is this Right to be there tomorrow recognised for the one this girl is today or for the one she is destined to become?

- Again, the answer is self-evident: The one that this girl is destined to become is the one who is granted the Right to be here tomorrow (and to live this moment of life to come).

- The Human who is today the subject of this Right is therefore the Human who today is yet to come ?

- I cannot dispute this deduction!
-

Conclusion :

- You have thus just admitted the legal recognition of the Human to come. However, you had told me, before the beginning of this exchange, that only the Human who exists is to be legally recognised! So you confirm that you were wrong? You confirm that the given equation, the one currently used in legal matters, is erroneous, or at least incomplete?

- Certainly! As I have nothing to say about your intellectual approach, which is based on only two questions to which the answers are obvious, I cannot deny that legal matters have been misguided, that it has always had a too limited understanding of Human to be placed under the protection of the Law.

‍
- The correct understanding of HL is therefore written as follows:
HL = H↓ + Hβ†’
H↓ (The Human who exists)

H→ (The Human to come)
- Certainly! In a few words, you have just compromised the Law on its most precious data.

Assessment:

"I Want today to protect your presence in the future.

But, when I speak of your presence in the future, I am not speaking of the You of the present moment.

The You I Want to protect today extends into the future
"

Once a legal data is identified, the question of its application arises:

> IIA