Human rights cannot be granted by governments

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Fair enough, but I am resistant to the thought that anything besides physical reality exists a priori.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Fair enough, but I am resistant to the thought that anything besides physical reality exists a priori.

I think that works with what I believe, too. Natural rights and natural laws are ethereal and exist only in the hearts and minds of individuals without any expressed definition.

a reply to: Profusion

"Rights" are always and only negative and never positive.

I don't have a "right" to the fruits of your labor.

The Perils of Positive Rights

Just as the new “liberalism” is fake liberalism, so the new “positive rights” are fake rights. In each case, the heart of a valid principle has been gutted.

Natural rights—or, as they have been un-euphoniously dubbed, “negative rights”—pertain to freedom from the uninvited interventions of others. Respect for negative rights requires merely that we abstain from pushing one another around. Positive rights, by contrast, require that we be provided with goods or services at the expense of other persons, which can only be accomplished by systematic coercion. This idea is also known as the doctrine of entitlements; that is, some people are said to be entitled to that which is earned by other people.

“Positive rights” trump freedom. According to this doctrine, human beings by nature owe, as a matter of enforceable obligation, part or even all of their lives to other persons. Generosity and charity thus cannot be left to individual conscience.1 If people have such positive rights, no one can be justified in refusing service to others; one may be conscripted to serve regardless of one’s own choices and goals.

If positive rights are valid, then negative rights cannot be, for the two are mutually contradictory. So the question is: which concept is the more plausible in the context of human nature, of how the issue of rights arose, and of the requirements of surviving and flourishing in a human community?

Our right might not be granted by the government but they surely and must be enforced by it through laws and rules. Maybe it would be different in a world without jerks and assholes but that's just the way it is.

a reply to: greencmp

We have the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The government can try to take more taxes from some people and give them to others. And they may even get away with it if we consent to be governed in that way.

But our Declaration of Independence is clear on how we -- as the people for which it was written -- can reject that government and institute a new one if they so severely damage our rights in their practices of the collection & spending of our tax money.

Human rights cannot be granted by governments...

unless you purchase a license

originally posted by: deadeyedick
Human rights cannot be granted by governments...

unless you purchase a license

Ha! I wonder if people organized and drafted a new Declaration of Independence modeled exactly on the first one, would the U.S. Government be bound to accept it since the first was accepted and serves a one of the core foundations for our government to this day....supposedly, heh, heh.

In theory, it's a recognized legal document -- no licenses should even be necessary.

a reply to: greencmp

Do you have a right to medical care?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: greencmp

Do you have a right to medical care?

Absolutely not and I also do not have a "right" to insurance.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

yea my state is pondering bill that would declare it a right to hunt and fish

oh the irony

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: greencmp

Do you have a right to medical care?

Absolutely not and I also do not have a "right" to insurance.

yet Maryland is the only state that gives one the right not to have insurance

live free or die

a reply to: deadeyedick

"right not to have insurance"

Oh dear God.

a reply to: greencmp

by your reaction one would think that such a policy would have done severe damage to the state or people in it

however it has not

social programming much?

a reply to: greencmp

Absolutely not and I also do not have a "right" to insurance.

So you won't mind bleeding to death in the street. Good to know.

a reply to: DJW001

I didn't say I don't like medical care, just that I don't have a "right" to it.

Much like I like sex but, I don't have a "right" to it.

Or do I.....

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: greencmp

by your reaction one would think that such a policy would have done severe damage to the state or people in it

however it has not

social programming much?

Please clarify, do you think you should be forced to buy insurance?

I do not so, I don't understand why you would think that I would.

a reply to: greencmp

My
bad

We are on the same page

I thought you were astonished that one could not be forced to buy ins.

brushing up on my reading comprehension skills now