Do 'Rights' Really Exist?

[Jeffersonmile]

Hence, I have a right to liberty and property.

The last contradicts the first. In order for everyone to be entitled to the right to live by the mere fact of being alive, requires a guarantee that everyone receives the material requirements of survival. Which negates any sort of supposed "right" to property, since to own is to deprive another of absolute, guaranteed, and unconditional use, even though the other's need might be greater.

Why do you hate freedom so much? Is it because the authoritarian ruling class has promised you a boon in exchange for your loyal and slavish service?

No it doesn't. You're confusing the right to live with the right to never die. It requires that people are able to access the material requirements of survival through the free exercise of their liberty. That's why trade exists. And for the most part, it's worked pretty well so far.

When I go to work, I expect to be paid for my work. I take issue with unfair taxation, and I take issue when my boss screws me out of the money I'm owed. So yeah - I guess I just "hate freedom."

[Agritum]

Succinctly, yes.

And we're not animals? Are we robots?

You know too much.

UNIT XS-89 "Norstal", YOU ARE SENTENCED TO INSTANT TERMINATION.

[Galloism]

Succinctly, yes.

And we're not animals? Are we robots?

Only Congress. A horrible experiment in artificial obstinance went horribly wrong.

No, we're higher order animals capable of long term rational thought and a level of intelligence accurately described as sapience.

[Empire of Vlissingen]

Classic rights died with the Patriot act!

[Nervium]

Classic rights died with the Patriot act!

As opposed to... pop/heavy metal rights?

[Jeffersonmile]

I'll rephrase. I have a right to life inasmuch as nobody has any right to kill me.

Nobody has any right to kill me because, yes, nobody has a greater claim to my life than I do. I'm not really understanding your question, here - who could possibly have a greater claim to my life and on what basis?

As for the issue of what happens in the natural world - the difference between human beings and other animals is that we are capable of making rational moral choices.

The question is what gives you a claim to your life.

Exactly. And the collective set of moral decisions generally decide what is considered a right.

I don't understand how that's relevant. If the two of us were trapped on a desert island, and we decided that you don't have a right to kill me, then I would just...y'know...carry on living. I wouldn't go drown myself in the sea.

[Zottistan]

Hence, I have a right to liberty and property.

The last contradicts the first. In order for everyone to be entitled to the right to live by the mere fact of being alive, requires a guarantee that everyone receives the material requirements of survival. Which negates any sort of supposed "right" to property, since to own is to deprive another of absolute, guaranteed, and unconditional use, even though the other's need might be greater.

Why do you hate freedom so much? Is it because the authoritarian ruling class has promised you a boon in exchange for your loyal and slavish service?

Any remotely functional government will agree that property rights aren't absolute.

[Hostenia]

Rights are, in my opinion, misnamed actions performed by human beings, and acknowledging the freedom of speech, or the right to free speech, is the same as saying that you acknowledge that people can and will speak freely, with some limitations achieved by their understanding of others. Rights exist regardless of whether or not a government acknowledges them or even respects them; they cannot be removed or denied, for this is changing the capabilities of human beings themselves.

[Genivaria]

Other then as a societal concept that humans made up and governments sometimes choose to enforce?
No.

[Empire of Vlissingen]

Classic rights died with the Patriot act!

As opposed to... pop/heavy metal rights?

With Classic rights i mean the rights like the right to vote and to have privacy.

In the Netherlands we also have social rights like the right to live in a clean enviroment and the right to have work.

[Mistelemr]

Rights are a social construct, socially accepted and agreed upon by groups of people and societies.

I remember that George Carlin piece and he discussed to possibilities, either we have infinite rights, or we have no rights.

We seem to have infinite rights and abilities given a concept of free-will. If we are simply determined then there is no need for rights.

Given the social contract we give up certain rights in order to coalesce into a greater whole.

[Zottistan]

The question is what gives you a claim to your life.

Exactly. And the collective set of moral decisions generally decide what is considered a right.

I don't understand how that's relevant. If the two of us were trapped on a desert island, and we decided that you don't have a right to kill me, then I would just...y'know...carry on living. I wouldn't go drown myself in the sea.

What?

So, you agree that rights come from other people, I guess? I'll be honest, I see the sequence here. What does you killing yourself have to do with me not having a right to kill you?

[Nervium]

As opposed to... pop/heavy metal rights?

With Classic rights i mean the rights like the right to vote and to have privacy.

So, basic, constitutional rights then?

[Morganutopia]

Rights are only Exist if you will fight for them.

[Empire of Vlissingen]

With Classic rights i mean the rights like the right to vote and to have privacy.

So, basic, constitutional rights then?

Yes.

[Jeffersonmile]

Classic rights died with the Patriot act!

As opposed to... pop/heavy metal rights?

I prefer the alt-country/grunge rights system.

[Empire of Vlissingen]

Is this propagenda ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVh75ylAUXY

[Dagoth Urr]

Are all people truly equal?

[Hostenia]

Equal in which regard?
By most standards, no, but many of them are subjective. Noone really is "equal" except in the absolute value of one's ability to modify the universe, which is always really small. And we're all equal in that we're all mortal.

[Jeffersonmile]

I don't understand how that's relevant. If the two of us were trapped on a desert island, and we decided that you don't have a right to kill me, then I would just...y'know...carry on living. I wouldn't go drown myself in the sea.

What?

So, you agree that rights come from other people, I guess? I'll be honest, I see the sequence here. What does you killing yourself have to do with me not having a right to kill you?

No. We agreed that nature does not confer upon you or anyone the right to kill me. Because we're trapped on a desert island and we have a lot of time on our hands.

So, we agreed that if I was to die, it would not be you who killed me. If I wanted to commit suicide, that would be another matter, but I didn't walk away feeling compelled by the laws of nature to kill myself. So in effect, we decided that my claim to my own life was greater than yours. Understand?

[Zottistan]

What?

So, you agree that rights come from other people, I guess? I'll be honest, I see the sequence here. What does you killing yourself have to do with me not having a right to kill you?

No. We agreed that nature does not confer upon you or anyone the right to kill me. Because we're trapped on a desert island and we have a lot of time on our hands.

It doesn't take that right away, either. I have the potential to kill you, therefore I have the right to kill you.

So, we agreed that if I was to die, it would not be you who killed me. If I wanted to commit suicide, that would be another matter, but I didn't walk away feeling compelled by the laws of nature to kill myself. So in effect, we decided that my claim to my own life was greater than yours. Understand?

No. What?

What would have stopped me from killing you? Nothing, except you.

[Norstal]

And we're not animals? Are we robots?

Only Congress. A horrible experiment in artificial obstinance went horribly wrong.

No, we're higher order animals capable of long term rational thought and a level of intelligence accurately described as sapience.

Alright, so naturally we are allowed the right to live because of our sapience. Any other animals don't have this right if they don't have sapience, correct? Are you saying then that animals don't have rights? Or perhaps, the concept of animals rights just means the rights we give to animals.

No. We agreed that nature does not confer upon you or anyone the right to kill me. Because we're trapped on a desert island and we have a lot of time on our hands.

So, we agreed that if I was to die, it would not be you who killed me. If I wanted to commit suicide, that would be another matter, but I didn't walk away feeling compelled by the laws of nature to kill myself. So in effect, we decided that my claim to my own life was greater than yours. Understand?

What if he needs you to survive and stop you from committing suicide? If you commit suicide, you will lessen his chance of survival, which infringes on his right to his own life. If he stops you from committing suicide, he is infringing on your right.

What then?

[Jeffersonmile]

No. We agreed that nature does not confer upon you or anyone the right to kill me. Because we're trapped on a desert island and we have a lot of time on our hands.

It doesn't take that right away, either. I have the potential to kill you, therefore I have the right to kill you.

So, we agreed that if I was to die, it would not be you who killed me. If I wanted to commit suicide, that would be another matter, but I didn't walk away feeling compelled by the laws of nature to kill myself. So in effect, we decided that my claim to my own life was greater than yours. Understand?

No. What?

What would have stopped me from killing you? Nothing, except you.

That's not the point. Of course you have the potential to kill me. I mentioned in my original post that this is not an ideal world populated by ideal people; that's why we need laws to protect our rights from each other.

You think I don't know that murders happen in real life?

[Zottistan]

It doesn't take that right away, either. I have the potential to kill you, therefore I have the right to kill you.


No. What?

What would have stopped me from killing you? Nothing, except you.

That's not the point. Of course you have the potential to kill me. I mentioned in my original post that this is not an ideal world populated by ideal people; that's why we need laws to protect our rights from each other.

You think I don't know that murders happen in real life?

So again, you agree that rights come from society, not from nature.

[Promised777Land]

The God excuse, the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument, "It came from God." Anything we can't describe must have come from God. Personally folks, I believe that if your rights came from God, he would've given you the right for some food every day, and he would've given you the right to a roof over your head. GOD would've been looking out for ya. You know that.

He wouldn't have been worried making sure you have a gun so you can get drunk on Sunday night and kill your girlfriend's parents.

But let's say it's true. Let's say that God gave us these rights. Why would he give us a certain number of rights?

The Bill of Rights of this country has 10 stipulations. OK...10 rights. And apparently God was doing sloppy work that week, because we've had to ammend the bill of rights an additional 17 times. So God forgot a couple of things, like...SLAVERY. Just...slipped his mind.

But let's say...let's say God gave us the original 10. He gave the british 13. The british Bill of Rights has 13 stipulations. The Germans have 29, the Belgians have 25, the Sweedish have only 6, and some people in the world have no rights at all. What kind of a...god given deal is that!?...NO RIGHTS AT ALL!? Why would God give different people in different countries a different numbers of different rights? Boredom? Amusement? Bad arithmetic? Do we find out at long last after all this time that God is weak in math skills? Doesn't sound like divine planning to me. Sounds more like human planning . Sounds more like one group trying to control another group. In other words...business as usual in America.

1: Things that are described and are not described by science, theology, philosophy, and man would still come from God in a biblical worldview regardless of whether it is described by someone.

2."Personally folks, I believe that if your rights came from God, he would've given you the right for some food every day, and he would've given you the right to a roof over your head." This statement is of expectations and not of obligations. If God gave rights, He would have given them for the world to see, whether through a messenger, a people, a book, or a conscious of right and wrong.

2a: When man sinned(Genesis), God cursed man to work the earth to earn his food and the earth would grow thorns, thistles, and weeds to fight against him. God has also commanded in His law, especially exemplified in the Book of Ruth, that family should redeem those who have fallen financially(broke, homeless, nowhere to turn, etc.) and to allow the hungry to come and eat what is left over by the harvesters. In fact, by God's laws in Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy everyone should be working together to take care of each other and love their enemies(Phileo and Agape, not the others except maybe Sterge).

2b: God should not be expected to make anyone's life the better than anyone else's materially. Why? Where in God's word does it say God will bring material prosperity upon all or upon a person who wants it? Look for it, but as far as I have read you shall reap what you sow.

3: Government is man-driven and therefore will always be fallible, taking good and bad things away, doing things right and wrong, and etc. It won't change until God changes it after the era of Grace into His era of The Kingdom of God. God's patience is not forever, as displayed with Canaanites, Amorites, Sodom, and Gomorrah. That's why He sent Jesus, His Son into the world to die and suffer God's Judgement, so that those who believe, repent, and walk with God in a personal(not perfect) relationship, and continuing in God's will by faith will be saved from God's law and its Holy consequences(not the earthly ones, because we must learn responsibility).

4: Before you blame others, know what they said they would or would not do. No one wants obligations expectations thrust upon them.

For those more curious about Why suffering is allowed, check out the works of William Craig and Ravi Zacharias. These guys do a fantastic job of explaining this. Also answersingenesis.com has much information to explain the biblical worldview and why it is logical, believable, and historical. Take Care and may the light of the Gospel shine upon you.