Quantum Windbag
Gold Member
- May 9, 2010
- 58,308
- 5,099
- 245
I'll try to cover all replies that attempt an answer this time around, if I miss one, reply with post number.
Katzndogz, What are those rights from Gawd? (Tautology) The Rabbi disagreed with your second reply, me too. Name a natural right?
Jillian, Agreed.
C_Clayton_Jones, Agreed, but the rights you outline come within the framework of government and its law. Ryan ruled out government. Other replies, we disagree on 'created rights' as law is always changing what was once assumed as fixed.
Peach174, Your entire answer is about government, you just give a different spin on government. (That could get us somewhere though) Your Second reply: You are using our establishment of government as your guide and 'pursuit' as an outcome, where is the 'right' and from whom?
UScitizen, Don't spoil the ending.
Intense, 'We enforce,' you do realize where that would lead?
Foxfyre, Again you give us government as the answer. Ryan ruled that out. What would a state of nature be? Name its rights?
There4eyeM, So Ryan was just using empty words? But interesting, if being alive is a right is the ACA a right? But then you leave us in your second reply with no real grounding?
Bill Angel, Another vote against Ryan's rhetoric?
TakeAStepBack, (replies) You are assuming roles of the government. Seems the more this goes on the less votes Ryan gets. Own yourself? A 'right' of person-hood, since I own myself can I pick my parents? No one told me. Kings are the reason we have government, and unless I'm mistaken, Ryan's livelihood comes solely from government, is he a groveler?
Moonglow, Another nah for Ryan?
Sherry, I sorta agree with you but for a different reason, I see many privileged children, mostly conservative republicans born with a silver spoon who have a real sense of entitlement, I see lots of the less privileged who have no sense of the reality of life. But this is off topic.
ABikerSailor, Bulls-eye.
Intense, So how do you account for much of our history and those theocratic nations who grant rights based on their religious texts? If they are wrong could this tell us something?
From the above comments Paul Ryan said something that cannot be anything more than empty rhetoric, that is always the case with extremists of any flavor.
So can we conclude 'rights' don't exist outside of government and society? Anyone else care to tackle the question?
Do you know what tautology means? Do you think that your use of tautology somehow proves you are above it? Natural rights are a philosophical position, not a legal one, demanding legal proof of the existence of philosophy is a bit like demanding that someone prove that reality is real.
Law, believe it or not, is not the definitive work of man.