Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Natural Rights: The right to discriminate vs the right not be discriminated against

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    As do I, which is why I find it fathomable that we can alter those rights.

    Which is why I dont understand why some rights and not others are forbidden to change if the public so wills it, sometimes perhaps against their best interest, sometimes perhaps against the interest of a minority.

    What I think this comes down to often times is your point of view, and what you have to lose or gain in the changing of the perception of rights that you have. Obviously people losing percieved rights will fight to keep them even if the other side doesnt deem it a right anymore.

    Given this though, is there a real line in the sand that we all can draw when doing this?
    "I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
    'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger

    Comment


    • #17
      As do I, which is why I find it fathomable that we can alter those rights.


      As do I. I'm just against altering them far more often than I'm for altering them...

      Given this though, is there a real line in the sand that we all can draw when doing this?


      I don't think so.
      KH FOR OWNER!
      ASHER FOR CEO!!
      GUYNEMER FOR OT MOD!!!

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
        It probably is a blow to personal property rights, but was deemed as a necessary (even welcome) sacrifice in order to end Jim Crow. I am inclined to agree.
        There is a hierarchy in the rights; before 1864 the property rights were higher than the freedom rights in the US hierarchy; this was reversed after 1864. Henceforth the property rights were slightly reduced as a consequence of their lower rank in the hierarchy.
        We could say that the total rights of US individuals were not changed but the hierarchy of their rights were modified.
        Statistical anomaly.
        The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
          To answer what I think is your most basic question, I don't believe in "natural rights". I don't think che does either. We only have what rights the government is willing to give us.
          We have whatever rights we demand and are willing to fight for.
          (\__/)
          (='.'=)
          (")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.

          Comment


          • #20
            Not always. You need enough people on your side to sway the government (in a democracy) or force its hand/overthrow it (in a non-democracy).
            KH FOR OWNER!
            ASHER FOR CEO!!
            GUYNEMER FOR OT MOD!!!

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by notyoueither


              We have whatever rights we demand and are willing to fight for.
              To us, it is the BEAST.

              Comment

              Working...
              X