Do Natural Rights Actually Exist?

[Monk-Eye]

" Audacious Claims For Supremacist Dictum Because Goad Will Not Speak For Itself "

* Natural Rites Hubris Of Invoking Goad While Denying Nature *

Aha - a fake-intellectual speaks with me.
Natural human rights have nothing to do with "nature". There is no physical research "human rights". Natural means in this case God-given.

Zone1 - Made In The Image Of Goad

" Made In The Image Of Goad " * Explanation Required * The hue mammon ape makes a claim that it is made in the image of goad , yet what are the implications of such a claim ?

www.usmessageboard.com

* Anthropocentric Flatulence *

It means such rights exceed the natural sphere of existence. I think if we like to be children of god (= free human beings) then we need to fight for all and every life.

Zone1 - Anthropocentic Psychosis : How Compelling And To Which Ends Are Its Impacts Within Hue Mammon Society ?

" Anthropocentic Psychosis : How Compelling And To Which Ends Are Its Impacts Within Hue Mammon Society ? " * Environmentalism Advocates Getting Ugly About Apex Predator Gluttony * An anthropocentric psychosis may be characterized as anthropocentrism which has become dysfunctional . *...

www.usmessageboard.com

* Ignorance Combined With Arrogance Makes For Political Science Nonsense *

Otherwise we never will be able to be free. Who is free is able to obey truth, love and reason. Or with other words: "Someone is an adult when they do what their parents suggest - even though it's the best thing to do."
The state as a greater individual? What nonsense is this? Nazi nonsense? Commie nonsense? How we govern ourselve is just simple an act of common values, common decisions and a common organisation. Sometimes criminals overtake.
No.
You are absurde. Konrad Lorenz wrote once "Das sogenannte Böse" (=The so called evil) which explains very well why aggressions are not evil. But what he said is a million miles far from you. There's a need for aggressions - but there is also a big need to control the own aggressions.
You seem to follow a strange form of political indoctrinaion. Compressed in only one expression I would say you follow a slave holder mentality. Freedom is freedom - that's it. A slave is only not bodily free in this world here in the moment now but I fear someone with a slave holder mentality never will be free.

Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments

" Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments " * Express Agreement Or Disagreement With These Premises * Does any agree or disagree that " equal wrights " advocates must make a distinction between negative and positive wrights ? Does...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[zaangalewa]

" Audacious Claims For Supremacist Dictum Because Goad Will Not Speak For Itself "

* Natural Rites Hubris Of Invoking Goad While Denying Nature *

Zone1 - Made In The Image Of Goad

" Made In The Image Of Goad " * Explanation Required * The hue mammon ape makes a claim that it is made in the image of goad , yet what are the implications of such a claim ?

www.usmessageboard.com

* Anthropocentric Flatulence *

Zone1 - Anthropocentic Psychosis : How Compelling And To Which Ends Are Its Impacts Within Hue Mammon Society ?

" Anthropocentic Psychosis : How Compelling And To Which Ends Are Its Impacts Within Hue Mammon Society ? " * Environmentalism Advocates Getting Ugly About Apex Predator Gluttony * An anthropocentric psychosis may be characterized as anthropocentrism which has become dysfunctional . *...

www.usmessageboard.com

* Ignorance Combined With Arrogance Makes For Political Science Nonsense *

Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments

" Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments " * Express Agreement Or Disagreement With These Premises * Does any agree or disagree that " equal wrights " advocates must make a distinction between negative and positive wrights ? Does...

www.usmessageboard.com

And what do you say?

 

[Monk-Eye]

* Aptitude Required *

" Reality Of Nature "

And what do you say?

Stop confusing the literal meaning of an after life , which is genetic continuance , with the metaphorical means by which to achieve it .

Applying THe Term Rights As A Descriptor For Articles Of Constitution Is Slang And A Profound Error In Diction

* Applying The Term Rights As A Descriptor For Articles Of A Constitution Is Slang And A Profound Error In Diction * * Opening Post Subjective Objective Sew Gnomon * The term right is a faux pas of diction , as to equivocate the term right with a mathematical norm leads to a contradiction ...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Captain Caveman]

Eh? If no rights exist - which responsibilities exist?

Ok. You are Tom Hanks and are washed up on a beach, just like in Castaway.

You tell me, are you going to stand there and reel off your rights, or are you going to be responsible and build a shelter, make a fire, forage for food?

I can see you standing on the beach, screaming at the sky, "I have the Right to Bare arms, I have the Right to WiFi, I have the Right to healthcare", (insert as many imaginary Rights you want). I'm busy building a shelter, making a fire, and catching fish. How did you get on?

Who heard your Rights?

 

[zaangalewa]

Ok. You are Tom Hanks and are washed up on a beach, just like in Castaway.

You tell me, are you going to stand there and reel off your rights, or are you going to be responsible and build a shelter, make a fire, forage for food?

I can see you standing on the beach, screaming at the sky, "I have the Right to Bare arms, I have the Right to WiFi, I have the Right to healthcare", (insert as many imaginary Rights you want). I'm busy building a shelter, making a fire, and catching fish. How did you get on?

Who heard your Rights?

The difference between us: You defend your omnipotence - but I defend your rights. For example your and everyone's right not to have to bare arms. To bare arms makes by the way unfree because no one will tell a coward who bares arms what's true but only what such an idiot likes to hear. And arms near arms. This is typical of an addictive structure. What you are able to see objectivelly in "cheap arms for everyone": Arms are like a social drug. Arms are dangerous - so the more people who bare arms the more people need to bare arms. And I will never understand what's fascinating about machines that spit little pieces of metal through the air. Idiotic. Such pieces could hurt someone - or even kill someone. Worse enough that hunter, policemen, soldiers and some others need to use such primitive and dangerous machines.

Why not to be much more civilized and to learn how to fight with a sword and tripping over the scabbard while walking?

 

[Captain Caveman]

The difference between us: You defend your omnipotence - but I defend your rights. For example your and everyone's right not to have to bare arms. To bare arms makes by the way unfree because no one will tell a coward who bares arms what's true but only what such an idiot likes to hear. And arms near arms. This is typical of an addictive structure. What you see in arms is like a social drug. Arms are dangerous - so the more people who bare amrs the more people need to bare arms. Amd I will never understand what's fascinating about machines that spit little pieces of metal through the air. Idiotic. Such pieces could hurt someone - or even kill someone. Worse enough that hunter, policemen and soldiers need such primitive machines.

That was as all just irrelevant to the thread. You just went off saying you go and defend Rights. But the arguement is, "Do natural Rights exist?", and they don't. You live in a community, with laws, you're just simply arguing which laws society should have and the government not touch. Outside of that society washed up on the beach, they mean fuck all. Just like the EU calling it a common set of laws for member states to follow, they labelled it Human Rights.

You have the responsibility to build a shelter, make a fire, and forage for food, or exercise your Right to stand s reaming at the sky and die from the elements.

 

[zaangalewa]

Stop confusing the literal meaning of an after life , which is genetic continuance , with the metaphorical means by which to achieve it .

You have a wife and children? Are you sure, dead man?

And some of my "spiritual" ancestors for example had been ancient Greek philosophers. No genetic continuance. From time to time I say: We are all Greeks under our skin! Or would you be you without basic knowledge in mathematics?

 

[zaangalewa]

That was as all just irrelevant to the thread. You just went off saying you go and defend Rights. But the arguement is, "Do natural Rights exist?" ...

Then read what I said about and refer to this what I said. It's not my fault that English discussions are chaotic. But I love also chaos - living chaos - not deadly chaos.

And yes natural rights = unalienable rights exist. Says your declaration of independence. Otherwise you are still a colony of the British kingdom.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Then read what I said about and refer to this what I said. It's not my fault that English discussions are chaotic. But I love also chaos - living chaos - not deadly chaos.

You omitted the bulk of my quote, that's why you're confused with the discussion.

Just answer the two part question, "You are washed up on a beach, what natural Rights did you say out loud, and now what?".

That should put you back on track.

 

[zaangalewa]

You omitted the bulk of my quote, that's why you're confused with the discussion.

Just answer the two part question, "You are washed up on a beach, what natural Rights did you say out loud, and now what?".

That should put you back on track.

I do not have any idea what you see in my words nor what you see in me at all. Something is in your brain - but what this is you are not able to show.

Whether I am washed up on a beach or not washed up on a beach makes what kind of difference in the existence of natural rights?

 

[zaangalewa]

... rights are an entirely human invention ...

Invention is perhaps the wrong word. A system of rights needs for example also logic and priorities. And what is the human invention to say: “Everyone is equal before the law”. Example: Although men are the main reason for abortion men do not have an abortion. And the aborted human being have no rights at all. So the value “Everyone is equal before the law” is basing on a reality behind the reality all around. And this reality in the background is still not realized. But step by step it will be realized in an unbelievable slow, long and difficult process. Is this "invention"? Let me go 500 years into one of the possible futures. The people there will despise us and be disgusted by us because we murder unborn human beings - the most helpless human beings of all human beings - in millions worldwide every year. And also possible aliens will despise us because we murder our own breed - what's absurde. This gives films about the funny species "homo sapiens" in the intergalatic TV also always a tragic underline.

 

[Captain Caveman]

I do not have any idea what you see in my words nor what you see in me at all. Something is in your brain - but what this is you are not able to show.

Whether I am washed up on a beach or not washed up on a beach makes what kind of difference in the existence of natural rights?

Well, you carry on preaching your Rights, and when that Lion starts eating you on the Serengeti, you make sure you tell it you have Natural Rights

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ok. You are Tom Hanks and are washed up on a beach, just like in Castaway.

You tell me, are you going to stand there and reel off your rights, or are you going to be responsible and build a shelter, make a fire, forage for food?

I can see you standing on the beach, screaming at the sky, "I have the Right to Bare arms, I have the Right to WiFi, I have the Right to healthcare", (insert as many imaginary Rights you want). I'm busy building a shelter, making a fire, and catching fish. How did you get on?

Who heard your Rights?

Not a useful analogy. Rights are a societal construct.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Not a useful analogy. Rights are a societal construct.

Laws are a social construct.

 

[zaangalewa]

Well, you carry on preaching your Rights,

I do not carry on. I am not preaching. And rights are independent from pronouns.

and when that Lion starts eating you on the Serengeti, you make sure you tell it you have Natural Rights

You have absolutelly not any light idea what you try to speak about. What for heavens sake do you think about when you use the word "rights"?

 

[zaangalewa]

Laws are a social construct.

Rights depend on justice. Not so laws. So if we let it be to try to find better laws which are more in contact with unalienable rights and real justice then we all will get essential problems.

 

[The Duke]

Do Natural Rights Actually Exist? If they do not then it's all intellectual bs. If they do, what are they? Can and do people who believe natural rights actually exist, agree on them -- what they are and are not?

I often see things similar to this Wikipedia entry:
Natural rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government, and so are universal, fundamental and inalienable (they cannot be repealed by human laws, though one can forfeit their enjoyment through one's actions, such as by violating someone else's rights).

Do natural rights trump laws? If so...

Damn you're a stupid Commie-warped dumbass. I'm sorry.
Possibly much of it isn't even your fault.

 

[The Duke]

Some people claim that to be so. But they offer what proof? It is opinion.

And what are you working with there, Skippy Dante?
Where is this Loosiana jump jive stuff coming from?

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Respecting All Life While Maintaining Selective Bias For Some Lives "

* Natural Deed Of Hue Mammon Indemnification *

You have a wife and children? Are you sure, dead man?

A subjective altruism of egoism is that introspection of its ego should exist in perpetuity ; however , empirical evidence of nature indicates that not every instance of introspection by an ego is required to satisfy a subjective altruism of egoism .

A sophisticated physical state is required for sentience , sapience and introspection , while perpetuity to satisfy the subjective altruism of egoism occurs by genetic continuance through procreation ; thus , anxiety of primordial obsessions in the puritanical and prurient arise .

An after life , or a life to come , or a transmutation of soles , or a reincarnation , or a born again , all are metaphors with a literal meaning of genetic continuance , through haploid ( half of diploid ) gametes ( game meets ) , where failure to do so in perpetuity is ascribed the metaphors of final judgement , or of eternal damnation .

Stop confusing the literal meaning of an after life , which is genetic continuance , with the metaphorical means by which to achieve it .

A female is always assured of satisfying a subjective altruism of egoism , as her offspring includes her haploid ; alternatively , males are not always assured of satisfying a subjective altruism of egoism and anxiety causes aggression .

* Identity Politics Conjuring Pythian Ethos Of Homonym And Synonym Spelling *

And some of my "spiritual" ancestors for example had been ancient Greek philosophers. No genetic continuance. From time to time I say: We are all Greeks under our skin! Or would you be you without basic knowledge in mathematics?

A first premise of realism is that no thing is separate from itself .

A proposition that the nature of nature is separate from itself is in contradiction with a first premise .

A proposition that goad is all things while goad is separate from nature is in contradiction with a first premise .

 

[ding]

A sophisticated physical state is required for sentience

All life forms are sentient to some degree or another, so unless that is the sophisticated physical state you are referring to, no.