Is Democracy Compatible with Natural Rights?

[ihopehefails]

Ability =/= 'right

recognizing ability =/= demonstrating a 'right'

agreeing to protect liberties to act on one's abilities =/= demonstrating a 'right'

You've just described the social contract - one that agrees to protect certain liberties and freedoms (such as speech and assembly)

They exist within or without of the social contract.

Demonstrate.

Define them.

Define an experiment to detect them.

Show them.

Measure them.

How easy....yawn...here it goes.

I wake up and get dressed. I did not need another's permission or validation for that action. The impulse to do that came from my own free will. I then decided to eat which also came from my own free will but I realized that the food in the house did not belong to me so I could not eat it since it was not mine. It belonged to another. I could not infringe on their right to eat their own food any more than they can infringe on mine. I decided to go to taco bell and get something. Again, no agreement from the collective allowed me to do that. I just did it. I then heard Obama's speech and said he is the biggest piece of shit on the face of the earth. Again, no agreement from the collective said I can do that since it was my own thoughts and ideas. No one had a right to those ideas but me and no one had a right to express those ideas other than me.

I can actually think of a whole list of things to do that do not require a list of things that are appropriate for me to do created by the collective agreement. These things that I can do are based on a concept of ownership. I did not own the food so I could not eat it but I owned by thoughts so I can express them however I wanted because of that.

Natural is based on individual ownership of 'things' such as physicial objects like food and non-physical object like thoughts and ideas. The point is is that those things belong to an individual within the community and not the to community itself so no one has a greater say over the use of those things than the individual that happens to own them.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0LhIIRzPCo&feature=player_embedded"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0LhIIRzPCo&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

[JBeukema]

I wake up and get dressed. I did not need another's permission or validation for that action.

ability

The impulse to do that came from my own free will

desire

. I then decided to eat which also came from my own free will but I realized that the food in the house did not belong to me so I could not eat it since it was not mine.

you could but you didn't as the social contract with (your roomate?) stipulates an agreement that you will not do so

I could not infringe on their right to eat their own food any more than they can infringe on mine.

a positive right you agreed to per your social contract- you could have easily agreed to hold all foodstuffs in common

I decided to go to taco bell and get something. Again, no agreement from the collective allowed me to do that.

Oh? Did you take a bus? Drive? Were you allowed to use the front door? Did anyone have to use the coloured entrence?

I just did it. I then heard Obama's speech and said he is the biggest piece of shit on the face of the earth. Again, no agreement from the collective said I can do that since it was my own thoughts and ideas.

they agreed to not throw you in prison for it

No one had a right to those ideas but me and no one had a right to express those ideas other than me.

ability =/= right

I can actually think of a whole list of things to do that do not require a list of things that are appropriate for me to do created by the collective agreement.

ability

These things that I can do are based on a concept of ownership.

a 'concept', eh? Concepts are human creations.

you've demonstrated ability, liberty, and the social contract. You've demonstrated the existence of no 'natural rights'

 

[JBeukema]

I already that video back when Agnapostate posted it some time ago

 

[Contumacious]

You've demonstrated the existence of no 'natural rights'

You can demonstrate the Natural Rights concept using intellectualism.

Unfortunately, others, like you, will only understand the term by looking at a picture:

.

 

[JBeukema]

right... it always comes down to racism and guns with you people

 

[Contumacious]

right... it always comes down to racism and guns with you people

Every thug in history has pretended not to understand natural rights and then sent armed goons to terrorized the people.

.

 

[Intense]

right... it always comes down to racism and guns with you people

Every thug in history has pretended not to understand natural rights and then sent armed goons to terrorized the people.

.

Bulls Eye!!! What it always seems to boil down to with this crowd, is a bug up their ass every time them controlling the lives of other individuals is challenged. Our works are evidence of our rights, it can't be any plainer. Justice is a natural right whether performed by man, beast, or the forces of nature. Some will never admit to that and that's fine, the only thing that remains is who gets the last word.

 

[Contumacious]

right... it always comes down to racism and guns with you people

Every thug in history has pretended not to understand natural rights and then sent armed goons to terrorized the people.

.

Bulls Eye!!! What it always seems to boil down to with this crowd, is a bug up their ass every time them controlling the lives of other individuals is challenged. Our works are evidence of our rights, it can't be any plainer. Justice is a natural right whether performed by man, beast, or the forces of nature. Some will never admit to that and that's fine, the only thing that remains is who gets the last word.

Exactly.

.