View Poll Results: Do you have the right to NOT exercise a right?

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

    40 88.89%
  • No

    2 4.44%
  • Other

    3 6.67%
Page 18 of 38 FirstFirst ... 8161718192028 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 377

Thread: The right to -not- exercise a right?

  1. #171
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: The right to -not- exercise a right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I simply disagree with the floppy definition of rights, and instead root them in the human race. All humans have the same base rights; everything stems from life, liberty, and property.
    So what you're saying is that white people STILL possess the right to own black people, as an example.

    But how do you reconcile the woman's newly invented right to murder her baby with that baby's right to life?

    Which right is dominant, and hence which right doesn't exist?

    You've glossed over that.

  2. #172
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    49,513

    Re: The right to -not- exercise a right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    So what you're saying is that white people STILL possess the right to own black people, as an example.

    But how do you reconcile the woman's newly invented right to murder her baby with that baby's right to life?

    Which right is dominant, and hence which right doesn't exist?

    You've glossed over that.
    If you claim that you understand my point then you'll understand that what you have written here is a purposeful misrepresentation of what I have stated (at least the first statement). As I said, if you wish to engage in honest, intelligent debate we may. I have no problem with that. But I shall not continue if all you want to do is engage in hyperbole and spin of my arguments. That's pointless.
    Last edited by Ikari; 11-05-09 at 10:26 PM.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #173
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    49,513

    Re: The right to -not- exercise a right?

    Quote Originally Posted by EpicDude86 View Post
    The floppy definition of rights IS indeed the problem here in this conversation.

    Define these base rights for me? Because I'm assuming most of what you're going to list would be contrary to some basic human instincts.
    All rights are derived from life, liberty, and property.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  4. #174
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In your dreams...
    Last Seen
    05-29-12 @ 12:53 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,621

    Re: The right to -not- exercise a right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    But how do you reconcile the woman's newly invented right to murder her baby with that baby's right to life?
    It's not an infant, it's a foetus.

  5. #175
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    26,250

    Re: The right to -not- exercise a right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    When you do the former. Otherwise, we'll have to accept that qualitative measurement can yield just as fine observation and result as quantitative.
    Except I did and now it's your turn. Or will you, as I suspect, try to wiggle out of it because you know it can't be done. Bald assertion doesn't make something true, but apparently that's all you've got.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! The Bitchspot Blog YouTube me! The Bitchspot Channel

  6. #176
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    26,250

    Re: The right to -not- exercise a right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    One has to understand that freedom is not an absolute in populations greater than one.
    I took out all of your examples, which were excellent by the way, but this is the point that I've been trying to get at. Just because we have various and sundry "freedoms" does not mean that those freedoms are unrestricted. In fact, there isn't an unrestricted freedom in existence. The idea that these rights are magically valid and unrestricted for everyone, just on someone's say-so is ludicrous.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! The Bitchspot Blog YouTube me! The Bitchspot Channel

  7. #177
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    26,250

    Re: The right to -not- exercise a right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari
    You refuse to listen and try to at least understand in some way my argument.
    That's because you've done nothing whatsoever to back up your argument, you just keep repeating it over and over and over as if that will somehow make it so. Even though people keep asking you to back up your assertions, you ignore it and purposely don't do it, mostly because you can't. How is anyone supposed to take such an argument seriously? It sounds more like a religious faith than it does a rational, well-reasoned, well-supported argument. Maybe that's really what you're trying to say, that you support the Holy Church of Libertarianism.

    If you choose to engage in honest, open debate to try to understand at least in some part where I am coming from; perhaps we can pick it up there.
    In honest, open debates, people actually defend their positions with evidence and reason. When do you think you might give that a shot?
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! The Bitchspot Blog YouTube me! The Bitchspot Channel

  8. #178
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    49,513

    Re: The right to -not- exercise a right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Except I did and now it's your turn.
    You have proven the laws of thermodynamics from first principle! Wow, since it's never been done before, color me impressed. Can I see these proofs?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Or will you, as I suspect, try to wiggle out of it because you know it can't be done. Bald assertion doesn't make something true, but apparently that's all you've got.
    No, I've pointed out everything already. You're defining "rights" through utility. But those aren't "rights". Rights are innate and inalienable to humans. What you define are societal norms and privilege. Many philosophies have rooted rights in the person; with life, liberty, and property being amongst the highest held. Just because I can be killed doesn't mean I don't have the right to life. If everyone else decided that there is no right to life, it doesn't mean that I don't have the right to life. But according to you, that's what happens.

    You want to say that all I've been doing is making assertions, but that's all you've done as well. When you give assertions to societal norms and morality defining rights, all you are doing is associating action with a "right" (again, that's not a right, but if you want to continue misusing the word; have fun). I gave you the thought exercise already. If someone threatens my life, I always have cause to fight it. If someone tries to steal from me, I always have cause to defend it. If someone tries to enslave me, I always have cause to resist it. That's because all humans share the same base rights, rights rooted in life, liberty, and property. These are the natural states, and while maybe I can be killed, or my stuff can be stolen, or maybe I could be enslaved; it doesn't mean that I don't have those rights. Those rights are innate to the person.

    As I said, your line of thought is amongst the most dangerous. It gives too much credit to the authority. Too much potential for abuse. It doesn't recognize humans as anything other than animals roaming about. Who's base "rights" are defined not through an absolute, an understanding of humanity and acknowledging that humans are humans and essentially the same; but rather through a floppy definition which allows those with the guns to define the "rights". A right cannot be floppy, floppy things tend to occupy the privilege category. As humans have evolved and our societies became more complex, and we were able to examine interactions and behaviors we discovered the base rights of humans. In the natural state all people are equal and independent, and all have the right to defend life, liberty, and property. While in the constrained state often brought with government these can be infringed upon, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

    Maybe you can read some Hobbes and Locke and come back. Then, even if you still don't agree, you can maybe be less of an ass about it.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #179
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: The right to -not- exercise a right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Except I did and now it's your turn. Or will you, as I suspect, try to wiggle out of it because you know it can't be done. Bald assertion doesn't make something true, but apparently that's all you've got.
    I'll give you something very simple to do then:
    Cite the text of the US Constitution that grants the people of the United States their rights.

  10. #180
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 05:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

    Re: The right to -not- exercise a right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    I'll give you something very simple to do then:
    Cite the text of the US Constitution that grants the people of the United States their rights.
    Constitution'd


    Though the only part I could think of remotely like this would be Article IV Sec. 2.

Page 18 of 38 FirstFirst ... 8161718192028 ... 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
  •