View Poll Results: Do You Believe in Natural Rights?

Voters
87. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    36 41.38%
  • No

    51 58.62%
Page 23 of 100 FirstFirst ... 1321222324253373 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 994

Thread: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

  1. #221
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    54,838

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Natural Rights

    "[i]Political theorists since the time of the ancient Greeks have argued in support of the existence of natural rights, meaning those rights that men possessed as a gift from nature (or God) prior to the formation of governments. It is generally held that those rights belong equally to all men at birth and cannot be taken away[i]".

    If it can be taken away, it is not a natural right. Name something you think is a Natural Right and we'll test it.
    That is correct - your inalienable rights cannot be taken away from you. They can nonetheless be abused. Again, you are confusing Natural Rights with Natural Law.
    Worth noting, Democrats: President Trump will have a Pen and a Phone. #Precedent.

  2. #222
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    54,838

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by spud_meister View Post
    Is there a natural right to not get cut in front of in a queue?
    That is an appeal to morality.

    The recognition of morality as subjective doesn't make it any less important
    On the contrary - the argument that morality is purely subjective and cannot be universal makes it almost worthless. It is not a moral code at that point, it is simply a series of personal preferences, with no greater force than an attachment to speaking French instead of Spanish or preferring Amber over Barley beer.

    Your founding fathers refused to recognise a natural right to property, does that make it OK for you to steal?
    The founding fathers of this country did, in fact, recognize property rights. They simply altered Locke's formulation of Life Liberty Property to Life Liberty Pursuit of Happiness in their most famous expression of inalienable rights.
    Last edited by cpwill; 05-18-15 at 07:07 AM.
    Worth noting, Democrats: President Trump will have a Pen and a Phone. #Precedent.

  3. #223
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    That is correct - your inalienable rights cannot be taken away from you. They can nonetheless be abused. Again, you are confusing Natural Rights with Natural Law.
    You may want to look up the definition of "inalienable".

    If it can be abused, it has been alienated from you, and is therefore not inalienable. Likewise an inalienable right is something which you can't give up volinteraly no matter how much you want to.

  4. #224
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 12:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherman123 View Post
    This topic seems to have popped up in a few threads recently so I thought I'd put this together. Put simply do you believe in the concept of natural rights? That is to say rights that are "not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable".

    Personally I don't. I think that Hobbes had it right when he intimated that the only 'natural right' that a human being possesses is the right to strive for their own survival. Everything else exists only at the sufferance of your own strength or the kindness of others. It is part of what makes civilization so essential and so valuable, because by creating a society we attempt to lift ourselves out of that war of all against all. This allows for freedom of speech, property rights, press freedoms, freedom of worship, etc. Absent organized society these 'rights' would be purely theoretical.
    There are no rights provided by nature, in fact if you look at nature in any sort of personified way, it pretty much wants to kill you and then recycle you. Its the job of any organism to carve out their space to live and any luxuries beyond that such as what we call freedoms.

    The only way this really happens is through force. Even opening your mouth requires the use of energy which is force.

  5. #225
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    54,838

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    You may want to look up the definition of "inalienable".
    Define: Inalienable
    in·al·ien·a·ble
    /inˈālēənəb(ə)l/
    adjective: inalienable
    unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor.
    "freedom of religion, the most inalienable of all human rights"

    Nope, I think I'm pretty much tracking, there.

    If it can be abused, it has been alienated from you
    That is incorrect. If it is abused then its exercise can be taken from you, not the right itself.

    Think of it as similar to ownership - if someone steals your car, that doesn't mean that they become the rightful owner of the car. You are still the rightful owner of the car, they have simply taken away your ability to exercise your ownership. You wouldn't run down the street, chasing your escaping vehicle, shouting "By Jove - they have taken the vehicle that once was mine but now is suddenly theirs through their exercise of physical control over it!", you'd be hurling obscenities at the people who took "your" car.
    Last edited by cpwill; 05-18-15 at 07:43 AM.
    Worth noting, Democrats: President Trump will have a Pen and a Phone. #Precedent.

  6. #226
    Global Moderator
    Engagement!
    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    45,034

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherman123 View Post
    Personally I don't. I think that Hobbes had it right when he intimated that the only 'natural right' that a human being possesses is the right to strive for their own survival. Everything else exists only at the sufferance of your own strength or the kindness of others
    Eh, see...I don't see Hobbes notion as being inconsistent with the belief of Natural Rights.

    I believe Human's have natural rights, IE that which they are free to do. A person by simply existing in this world can say what they want, go to where they want, believe what htey want, take what they want, etc. There is no inherent internal limit upon a person from doing those things.

    However, it is simply a natural right to have the capacity to do those things. There is no natural right to have your rights protected nor respected by anyone else. Engaging in your rights either requires that it does not conflict with anyone else OR, if it does, that either you are stronger in some fashion and thus can force your will upon them OR they are benevolent and allow you to do it.

    Forming society simply codifies the protections related to some rights; it forms a social agreement of where individuals will benevolently allow your rights to be acted upon and where they will join together to stop them from occuring.

    I definitely believe in Natural Rights, and believe them to be a significantly different thing than Societal Rights.
    Imagine if Walmart owned access to all the streets in your town. You can go to Target or the mom and pop downtown if you want, but all the roads leading there require a toll, whereas the roads leading to Walmart are free. That is not the avenue the internet needs to go down.

  7. #227
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 09:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    It's not at all inconsistent to argue that "rights" are as inalienable as ones ability to enforce them, while fighting to enforce ones "rights".
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  8. #228
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:56 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    76,063

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Actually he did . He described slavery as an abominable crime, considered it a violation of the founding beliefs of the nation, tried to limit and restrict it so that it would die naturally (sometimes succeeding, sometimes failing), and lamented that he could not find a practical solution to its' absolution.

    You could say that his actions were not perfectly self-sacrificial in order to serve his beliefs, and I think you'd get most folks to agree with you on the hypocrisy. But that doesn't change his belief system.

    To say that "his actions were not perfectly self sacrificial in order to serve his beliefs" is an understatement that belongs in the category that a trans continental walk is a decent workout.

    They were the direct and complete opposite of what he stated. You could not get more opposite or contrary.

    So what it comes down to is do you judge the man by his mere words or by his actual daily actions and deeds. And you are wise enough to know a hundred examples which all say the same thing - actions speak louder than words.

    Yes - the politically naive or the gullible or those virgins to such matters can be taken in and fooled by a politicians words. But you do not fit into any of those categories.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  9. #229
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:56 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    76,063

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    you have made that claim many a time and it continually fails to accurately discuss the difference between scope and coverage. The founders certainly believed the natural rights were there for THEM
    Scope - covereage - cranistans - frangeleo's - all nonsense trying to justify somebody saying the equal of molesting children is wrong while buggering a 12 years old as the words pour from their lips. If that is offensive - it is meant to be since slavery is about as offensive as one can get.

    And you are wrong that they believed natural rights were only there for them. Jefferson clearly wrote that ALL MEN were included. And Jeffersons own writings made it very very clear leaving no doubt that he was well aware that Africans were human beings and what was being done was an abomination.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  10. #230
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    That is incorrect. If it is abused then its exercise can be taken from you, not the right itself.
    If you cannot excersize the right, the right still exists but you have been alienated from it. It is still a right but it is not an inalienable right.

    If you are blocked from practicing religion freely, your right to free religious expression has been alienated from you.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Think of it as similar to ownership -
    Perfect example to prove my argument. If my car is stolen, it's still my car, but I have been alienated from it. It has been taken from me. Also if my car were inalienable, I could never sell it or give it away. My car is therefor not inalienable.

Page 23 of 100 FirstFirst ... 1321222324253373 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •