Simple Question:

[JBeukema]

Only if the 'others' are legally protected from harm.

My right to do as I wish with/to my own body extends to acts which cause direct harm to others so long as they are legally protected from harm?

 

[percysunshine]

Does my right to do as I will with or to my own body and property extend to acts which cause harm to another or does it not?

You are entitled to do anything you wish...except eat french fries in New York City.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Only if the 'others' are legally protected from harm.

My right to do as I wish with/to my own body extends to acts which cause direct harm to others so long as they are legally protected from harm?

No. You do not have the right to harm others, provided the others are legally protected from such harm.

 

[JBeukema]

Only if the 'others' are legally protected from harm.

My right to do as I wish with/to my own body extends to acts which cause direct harm to others so long as they are legally protected from harm?

No. You do not have the right to harm others, provided the others are legally protected from such harm.

So Hitler had the right to kill the Jews since they didn't have legal protection?

So when I get a law passed saying Whites have no rights, you'll be cool with that?

I always knew you were a Statist.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Simple Question:
Does my right to do as I will with or to my own body and property extend to acts which cause harm to another or does it not?

Of course it does JB!

Just ask the owners of any weapons manufacturer, chemical plant or oil company.

 

[snjmom]

Does anyone else have the right to my body? Should I be legally required to share my body with anyone that needs it?

Do you have the right to protect yourself from an invader, even one that you let in willingly?

If you let it in willingly, it's not an invader. By definition.

What if it got let in by accident?

 

[NYcarbineer]

My right to do as I wish with/to my own body extends to acts which cause direct harm to others so long as they are legally protected from harm?

No. You do not have the right to harm others, provided the others are legally protected from such harm.

So Hitler had the right to kill the Jews since they didn't have legal protection?

So when I get a law passed saying Whites have no rights, you'll be cool with that?

I always knew you were a Statist.

Maybe you should define what you mean by the word 'right' in your question.

 

[NYcarbineer]

My right to do as I wish with/to my own body extends to acts which cause direct harm to others so long as they are legally protected from harm?

No. You do not have the right to harm others, provided the others are legally protected from such harm.

So Hitler had the right to kill the Jews since they didn't have legal protection?

So when I get a law passed saying Whites have no rights, you'll be cool with that?

I always knew you were a Statist.

Are you Hitler?

You asked if YOU had the right. You are here, now.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Funniest thing about this thread?

The OP referring to his question as a 'simple' question.

 

[JBeukema]

No. You do not have the right to harm others, provided the others are legally protected from such harm.

So Hitler had the right to kill the Jews since they didn't have legal protection?

So when I get a law passed saying Whites have no rights, you'll be cool with that?

I always knew you were a Statist.

Maybe you should define what you mean by the word 'right' in your question.

If you can't read for comprehension in context, then you're too stupid to bother with.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So Hitler had the right to kill the Jews since they didn't have legal protection?

So when I get a law passed saying Whites have no rights, you'll be cool with that?

I always knew you were a Statist.

Maybe you should define what you mean by the word 'right' in your question.

If you can't read for comprehension in context, then you're too stupid to bother with.

It doesn't define itself in context.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So Hitler had the right to kill the Jews since they didn't have legal protection?

So when I get a law passed saying Whites have no rights, you'll be cool with that?

I always knew you were a Statist.

Maybe you should define what you mean by the word 'right' in your question.

If you can't read for comprehension in context, then you're too stupid to bother with.

Does my right to do as I will with or to my own body and property extend to acts which cause harm to another or does it not?

How does the context define what sort of right you are talking about? Under the law? Morally? Philosophically?

 

[JBeukema]

Maybe you should define what you mean by the word 'right' in your question.

If you can't read for comprehension in context, then you're too stupid to bother with.

It doesn't define itself in context.

Yes, it does, if you know how to read.

Read your post, then read mine in full. Don't be scared to sound out the big words.

 

[Flagwavrusa]

Does my right to do as I will with or to my own body and property extend to acts which cause harm to another or does it not?

Of course it does. Absolutely not. The answer completely depends upon the context.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Maybe you should define what you mean by the word 'right' in your question.

If you can't read for comprehension in context, then you're too stupid to bother with.

Does my right to do as I will with or to my own body and property extend to acts which cause harm to another or does it not?

How does the context define what sort of right you are talking about? Under the law? Morally? Philosophically?

Might makes right. Has since the the first man got hungry. It's getting better though... To the future!

 

[AVG-JOE]

Does my right to do as I will with or to my own body and property extend to acts which cause harm to another or does it not?

Of course it does. Absolutely not. The answer completely depends upon the context.

I see you are a judge. Kudos, it's a tough job.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you can't read for comprehension in context, then you're too stupid to bother with.

It doesn't define itself in context.

Yes, it does, if you know how to read.

Read your post, then read mine in full. Don't be scared to sound out the big words.

Real, tangible, enforceable rights are determined by the government. So, no, YOU personally, here and now, do not have the right to do whatever you please if it harms someone else.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you can't read for comprehension in context, then you're too stupid to bother with.

Does my right to do as I will with or to my own body and property extend to acts which cause harm to another or does it not?

How does the context define what sort of right you are talking about? Under the law? Morally? Philosophically?

Might makes right. Has since the the first man got hungry. It's getting better though... To the future!

Yes that's absolutely true. Your rights are determined by who you are, where you are, when you are. Your rights are determined by who holds the power to determine what your rights are.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Does my right to do as I will with or to my own body and property extend to acts which cause harm to another or does it not?

Of course it does. Absolutely not. The answer completely depends upon the context.

True.

 

[Jack Fate]

Does my right to do as I will with or to my own body and property extend to acts which cause harm to another or does it not?

How does the context define what sort of right you are talking about? Under the law? Morally? Philosophically?

Might makes right. Has since the the first man got hungry. It's getting better though... To the future!

Yes that's absolutely true. Your rights are determined by who you are, where you are, when you are. Your rights are determined by who holds the power to determine what your rights are.

Only a wimpy liberal like you would think his rights were determined by someone else. You're nothing but a whiney sissy. Let's see you stand up, pull your pants up off your ass, and get your damn head out of la la land. Dumb ass,