What Constitutes a "Right?"

[Intense]

Intense said Jefferson was Jesus, so it's kinda hard to take anything it posts seriously

You are a Joke, and really have no business here.

You're the one who compares Jefferson to the red text (Jesus) in the bible


You're still evading, I see

you already conceding that you're an idiot twice (including your assertion that I have a right to rape you and cut your throat when i cum in your ass, then changing your mind) and you've yet to enumerate and demonstrate these 'natural rights'

No you must also demonstrate the existence of moral absolutes, since you raised in in your earlier post

I Describe Jefferson as Accepting Psalm's, Proverbs, and The Red Letter Script (Which is Attributed To Jesus Quotes) of the New Testament. You are beyond Moron.

Who do you think you are talking to me or anybody like that? That statement alone is the total sum of your worth. You are the lowest of the Low. Keep Reference to Your Fantasy, and Sexual Desires to Yourself. They have no place in Civil Discussion. You have no Place in Civil Discussion.

 

[Contumacious]

Firstly my apologies for reproducing the OP and commenting before reading the rest of the thread. In my defence I have been away for a week and I'm catching up.

A right is what society says it is. There are no "natural" rights.

I'll read on and if needs be will defend my position but very interesting OP Kevin.

You say a Right is what Society says. So does the French Constitution. We However believe in an Authority Higher than Society, higher than Government. Study John Locke on the matter. I posted Quotes from Madison and Jefferson that bear directly on the topic. yourself

Isn't there an obligation of the appropriate institution to step in when some nut job kills his whole family because "God made him do it"?? .

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;


.

 

[MaggieMae]

A "right" is something that you have naturally. You have a right to your life, your liberty, your property, and your personal pursuit of happiness. The word "right" is thrown around too loosely in politics. If you believe you have a right to something then look at the situation deeper. Does your supposed "right" require the government's force to back it up? Does your "right" require the government to take from one person through taxation to supply you with your "right?" If the answer is yes then your "right" is clearly not a right at all because it violates somebody else's right to their own property. You cannot have a right to something that violates somebody else's rights.

Kevin, you are full of shit. There are no 'natural' rights. For most of history, right only belonged to those with might. The Constitution of the United States is most unnatural. And, by being that, it created an atmosphere in which real progress could prosper. If we dedide that we can create universal access to Health Care, then that becomes a right for our citizens. And creates more freedom for the American Citizen.

Our nation was founded on the belief of natural rights so if what you say is true we should have stayed a part of Great Britain. As for healthcare being a right and giving us more freedom, I'd say you're quite mistaken. Freedom doesn't entail the government taking from one person to give to another.

So now you're trying to argue the Sixteenth Amendment? You make no sense, none.

 

[JBeukema]

Seems to me, the only way for a right to be natural is if there exists the force of government to back them up...

... which means it's not natural at all

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;


SO the federal government did not give me my rights................nor create the internets.


.

Appeal to a document with no weight, legal or otherwise, is not only a fallacy, but a sign of mental retardation

 

[Liability]

ummm, no...the right to own property comes from the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution, which is law legislated by Congress (elected by the people) for the purpose of creating a just society, governed by the rules THEY ELECT REPRESENTATIVES to create and enact.



"Rights" are whatever we (the people) decide they are (as a society). Theoretically, we could blame ourselves for the social disaster we're a part of. But that's such a simpleton perspective. The truth is, there will always be that group of people that desire power above all else, and prey on those that don't think very well to achieve their own agendas.

I personally think my generation (baby boomers) are largely to blame for the "me first" attitude in this country. Had that been the case in the 1930's and 1940's, there is no doubt Hitler would have won. The prosperity following WWII spoiled us as a nation, and we boomers felt we were "owed" a comfortable easy life.

So when those same people came into their power years (the 1980s and 90s) that "spoiled" nature reared it's ugly head. Corrupt people advanced to become Presidents, CEOs and Directors of most the major corporations in this country. The deregulation of the 1980s and lack of government oversight/protection allowed big business to effectively hijack government and the legal system with big money, and control monetary policy. If we're EVER going to fix our system, first we will have to take away the rights of corporations to affect legislation (while they are legal entities, they should not have "civil" rights as individuals do).

The Constitution was never meant to give social power to business. Business exists for the benefit of society, not the other way around. Unfortunately, a by-product of capitalism is it's embrace of greed. Don't get me wrong, I AM a capitalist. I believe in a capitalistic approach to business within markets where that system works well. It is NOT, however, the be all and end all of economics. For that, we need a more practical solution in those markets where the "profit" motive simply doesn't work (such as healthcare), and supply and demand are unbalanced. You know the drill, I can decide not to buy a stereo if I feel it's too expensive, but I'm not likely to turn down a heart transplant no matter what the price. So I, for one, think that qualifies as "unbalanced" demand.

So, whatever we, the people, decide we want (or don't want) the government to manage for us is up to us. That doesn't make us "socialist" at all. It makes us "socially responsible" to each other, and is simply a better way to live. (mho).

dangit! rambling again

-sensored

No rights come from the Constitution. The founders believed in natural rights and wrote the Constitution to defend the rights that we as human beings naturally have.

You're nuts. Without quoting them directly, the Bill of Rights includes freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to assemble peaceably, and the rght to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Of course within that amendment, many laws have been written concerning tangible rights of citizens, but that was the intent.

If a right exists, such as my right to speak my mind, then writing it down as part of a list of things over which the gubmint has no valid say does not create that right. The right pre-existed the writing part.

I have a right to swing my closed fist, too. My right to do so, however, does NOT go so far as the point where I make contact with your nose (or even wheere I get so close to it that I interfere with your right not to be physically threatened by my behavior).

Rights are NOT "all or nothing" constructs.

SOME rights may be absolute or nearly absolute.

Other rights quite a bit less so.

And there is no contradiction in noting as much.

 

[JBeukema]

AGG: America never had a revolution

 

[RadiomanATL]

AGG: America never had a revolution

There was the civil war.

Failed revolution?

 

[JBeukema]

You don;t have a right to swing that fist, liar billy


contact or no, you go to jail

 

[Contumacious]

Buekema Inserts in His Argument that If Someone Believes that There are Laws Higher than Government, that it is License to Reign Chaos. t.

He is right:

Hitler prevented chaos by wiping out 6,000,000 Jews;

Lenin prevented chaos by eliminating nating 9,000,000 million ;

Pol Pot prevented chaos by eliminatinh over 200,000

Clinton prevented chaos by eliminating over 90 Davidians and one Elian Gonzalez;

I loves it when gubmint eliminates chaos.


.

 

[MaggieMae]

The Founders.

Great, smart men.

Still, one could be forgiven for pondering that ******* a slave woman while penning "all men are created equal" does reveal some form of hypocrisy.

Just maybe?

Or maybe not, he did not pen "all women are created equal".

His pursuit of happiness came at the expense of Sally's.

How bout we found our own ethics away from the founders?

Just a thought.

Exactly. What the founders believed 200+ years ago as an inherent Christian "right" was actually wrong, in many instances. Some have been corrected by amendment, many have not. What "natural right" (God-given?) compelled them to believe that slaves (human beings) were chattel? That only white men could own property? That women could not vote?

 

[Liability]

You don;t have a right to swing that fist, liar billy


contact or no, you go to jail

Completely incorrect, JPuke.

Lots of people REGULARLY swing fists with not even a minor threat of jail resulting.

A lot, of course, depends on the circumstances.

In SOME cases even making contact would not get one arrested.

 

[JBeukema]

AGG: America never had a revolution

There was the civil war.

No, there wasn't

Failed revolution?

failed war for independence

 

[JBeukema]

You don;t have a right to swing that fist, liar billy


contact or no, you go to jail

Completely incorrect, JPuke.

Lots of people REGULARLY swing fists with not even a minor threat of jail resulting.

A lot, of course, depends on the circumstances.

In SOME cases even making contact would not get one arrested.

you made it clear in your post you weren't talking about those instances, liarbilly

stop trying to weasel about

 

[Liability]

ANY discussion or rights is incomplete without some reference to DIVINE RIGHTS

Let's use the current mani avatar as an illustration:

One might say that the lady in that image has a divine right, but even though it is partially obscured, she clearly has a pretty divine left, too!

 

[RadiomanATL]

AGG: America never had a revolution

There was the civil war.

No, there wasn't

What was the civil war, if it wasn't a civil war?

 

[MaggieMae]

A "right" is something that you have naturally. You have a right to your life, your liberty, your property, and your personal pursuit of happiness. The word "right" is thrown around too loosely in politics. If you believe you have a right to something then look at the situation deeper. Does your supposed "right" require the government's force to back it up? Does your "right" require the government to take from one person through taxation to supply you with your "right?" If the answer is yes then your "right" is clearly not a right at all because it violates somebody else's right to their own property. You cannot have a right to something that violates somebody else's rights.

Kevin, you are full of shit. There are no 'natural' rights. For most of history, right only belonged to those with might. The Constitution of the United States is most unnatural. And, by being that, it created an atmosphere in which real progress could prosper. If we dedide that we can create universal access to Health Care, then that becomes a right for our citizens. And creates more freedom for the American Citizen.

Old Rocks, You are full of shit, as I sit here Reading evidence of what you deny and yet draw from to articulate your post, I worry about you. You exist in or out of society. Are you defenseless in the woods, or any where you are alone? Do you have ability only to act, defend, maintain, service, create, develop only within the bound of Government Instruction? Get Your head out of your ass, if that is the case, and make a stand, man. Even the Animals of the field don't ask for Government sanction to defend what is their own, be it Life, or habitat. Government is Not God.

That's really a stretch. I believe if there is a "God" that s/he directs the hands of the humans He created, such as the physicians and surgeons who save lives. You're talking about primitive man. We've come a long way, baby.

 

[Liability]

You don;t have a right to swing that fist, liar billy


contact or no, you go to jail

Completely incorrect, JPuke.

Lots of people REGULARLY swing fists with not even a minor threat of jail resulting.

A lot, of course, depends on the circumstances.

In SOME cases even making contact would not get one arrested.

you made it clear in your post you weren't talking about those instances, liarbilly

stop trying to weasel about

Actually, JPuke, as is so often the case, you are totally incorrect again. I made no such thing clear as my intent.

YOU are just not up to solid comprehension yet. Take yer meds. That might help, twit.

 

[Intense]

... which means it's not natural at all

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;


SO the federal government did not give me my rights................nor create the internets.


.

Appeal to a document with no weight, legal or otherwise, is not only a fallacy, but a sign of mental retardation

Misquoting, Accusing, Fabricating, Inventing, adding content as you go, as You trudge on is a sure sign of Your Insanity, and the depths you are willing to go to destroy what you cannot control. Predator.

My Rights are Natural, recognized by Government, Supported by Government, And exist with or without Your Consent or Control. You have attempted to Add to that in many ways from Your Imagination, to what end I can only assume, You are the scum of the earth though, just so You know that I know it.

 

[Contumacious]

... which means it's not natural at all

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;


SO the federal government did not give me my rights................nor create the internets.


.

Appeal to a document with no weight, legal or otherwise, is not only a fallacy, but a sign of mental retardation

I see, so in order for me to appear sane I must let you and yours enslave me , disarm me, and dictate to me................bwahahahahahahahah.........not as long as I own my retarded Mossberg 590.


Let's see you be smoking Mexican sinsemilla, right?


.

 

[rubberhead]

define 'freedom' for the sake of this discussion. We all have the liberty to do anything we want, insomuch as we are able and ther is nothing to stop us from carrying out an act. This has nothing to do with any ';right', but merely our own power. TO claim this makes it a right would be saying that we have a 'right' to do anything we have the power to do, or 'might makes right'. This means to contend I have a right to rape you in the ass so long as I am able

By freedom I mean a person's dominion over their own agency. I didn't think that such a thing would be confusing. And no, you would not be able to rape me unless your doing so did not infringe upon my freedom. That is, you could not rape me unless I wished to be raped, thus making rape an inappropriate characterization of your actions.

Your refusal to bend over infringes on my right to cum where I wish

Therefore, you have no right to your own body

care to rephrase your argument?


the rights are implied by the rights?


Do you not see what's wrong with that statement?

You've yet to demonstrate any 'rights' at all


If will = rights, then I still have the right to rape you and cut your throat as I cum in your ass

Do you really want to cling to that argument?

I am a realist. Look at human history. If you think all wealth can be generated from 'untapped resources' forever, you're an idiot. It's never been the case and it never will. Someone's not going to fish, hunt, pump their own oil, build their own roads, run their own electric plant....




That's social contract Specifically, the consent of the governed



It fails due to greed, our and simple. Many Americans don't own property and are perfectly content

.

If someone is free to choose to work or not, then they have the right to keep the fruit of their own labor.

And someone else is free to take it, given the definition of 'freedom' you provided.

Unless you introduce a social contract where thieves are punished, thus instituting a positive right to keep one's own earnings

And before you start splitting hairs, no I don't mean they get to keep the cars that they help build on the assembly line. What I mean is, the creator of the wealth get to keep the value that they create

Actually, they keep less. That's how businesses stay in business. The factory worker takes home less wealth than he generates for the boss.

This is not a refutation in the least. Yes, rights imply rights. Freedom for all => the rest of the individual rights. It would be circular if I said the right to freedom implies the right to freedom, which technically it does actually. This is called a tautology. You'll probably find that term in the undergraduate philosophy textbook that you've apparently gotten halfway through. No, you don't have the right to rape me because that violates my rights. My argument still stands. In a free society, workers negotiate their wages with employers. So if they don't take home what value they create then it's their own fault. Please come up with actual arguments or I'm going to have to stop wasting my time sifting through your incendiary posts which are, thus far, 90% garbage.