If not full ownership, eventually groups of people will have to have some sort of jurisdiction over certain regions on the moon.
Can we divide it up into sections like we have with Antarctica?
this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2025
32 points (97.1% liked)
Space
1618 readers
150 users here now
A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics
Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instance’s local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.
Related Communities
🔭 Science
- !curiosityrover@lemmy.world
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !esa@feddit.nl
- !nasa@lemmy.world
- !perseverancerover@lemmy.world
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !space@beehaw.org
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The states that have claims over Antarctica exercise no effective jurisdiction over them. The Antarctic Treaty basically just confirms their existence, gives the US and USSR the right to each make one whenever they want, and then moves on to laying out what can and can't be done on the continent without regard to the claims.
Nuh uh, I clearly bought a plot of land on the moon 30 years ago and gave it to my friend as a present!
Shortly before launch, the Navajo Nation lodged a formal complaint with NASA and the US Department of Transportation, saying that sending human remains to the lunar surface violated its sanctity. The letter said, in part, "It is crucial to emphasize that the moon holds a sacred position in many Indigenous cultures, including ours. The act of depositing human remains and other materials, which could be perceived as discards in any other location, on the moon is tantamount to desecration of this sacred space."
If a religion gets to say what can and can't be on the moon, that's hardly a solution.
Like, an important location on ancestral lands is one thing...
Claiming the entire fucking moon is another.
Is it another thing? I don't see how this is different from respecting areas that are held sacred by different religions, like much of the major holy sites in India or Palestine-Israel. Just because it's shared that doesn't give you a right to desecration.
Just because it’s shared that doesn’t give you a right to desecration.
Well, I'd think an important metric would be "how much space is being set aside for a single religions holy sites".
For the moon, thats...
About 14,500,000 square miles.
For reference Asia is the largest continent at 17,300,000 and Africa is the second largest at about 11,000,000.
And that's not even getting into an absolute shit ton of other religions also worship some aspect of the moon and have the same "claim" to be able to say what happens. Or even to say that now that it's able to be done, they want their ashes to rest on their own most sacred site?
That's the point between a local small area and the freakin moon.
Exclusivity of "ownership".
Hey, would you like to join my religion? We hold sacred not only The Moon but also Mars, the asteroids, Europa, Enceladus, and all the precious metals and water they contain. The rest of humanity must make a peace offering an our temples every time anyone wants to do any building or mining.
Technically the UN has responsibilities for land negotiations for which there is no clear agreement on ownership. But many nations don’t recognize that (like India and Pakistan)