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 22 of 38 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 377

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

  1. #211
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

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

    Quote Originally Posted by 1069 View Post
    Abortion is a good example; it is a right.
    Males and non-pregnant females don't have the capacity to exercise this right, although they still have it.
    Pregnant females do have the capacity to exercise this right, although they certainly have the right not to.
    But then again Abortion is a man-made term, a definition of something that a woman could naturally (some sort of instinct?) do but would probably not have done had civilization not come up with it...oh **** I am confused...what the hell did I just say?

  2. #212
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

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

    Quote Originally Posted by EpicDude86 View Post
    I believe it can be answereded! A Moral Concept DOES exist. It's an abstract idea. It's been noted and passed on. now is there are concrete evidence of morals? Eh...not really, 'cept for those who choose to practice morality.
    What do you mean, "is there concrete evidence of morals?"

    There is evidence of "morals" because people espouse them; I'm not sure how you could contend otherwise. That's not proof that they're right or wrong, merely that they exist.

    Natural rights theory is simply a moral affirmation of an innate desire to live in accordance with one's will. Natural rights are NOT invisible force fields that are supposed to protect you from all transgressions. It's a moral concept that is justified by a set of biological and psychological axioms.

  3. #213
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    If you have the right to X, do you have the right to NOT exercise that right?
    No, not neccesarily. For example, you have the right to bear arms, but you do not have a right to refuse to bear arms if you get drafted. Or, you have the right to free speech, but you do not have a right to remain silent, for example, if you know that someone committed a murder.

  4. #214
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,779

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    You want evidence that a moral concept exists? What kind of a stupid question is that?
    No, I want evidence that this so-called moral concept is factually true. You can believe there are monkeys coming out of your butt, I'm not going to take you seriously until you can validate your belief.

    Otherwise, it's just a bunch of mindless, fanatical handwaving nonsense.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  5. #215
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    10-26-10 @ 06:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,978

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

    Quote Originally Posted by EpicDude86 View Post
    But then again Abortion is a man-made term, a definition of something that a woman could naturally (some sort of instinct?) do but would probably not have done had civilization not come up with it...oh **** I am confused...what the hell did I just say?
    Well, fine.
    I can just as easily come up with a handful of other examples, without even trying very hard.
    I have the right to own a gun; I choose not to exercise this right.
    Many people have the right to vote and choose not to- I think that in an average election year, less than 60% of eligible voters actually vote. This last election, it was a little more. 66%, maybe?
    People in the US have the right not to be physically assaulted, but some of them choose to enter into consensual S&M relationships and voluntarily forfeit this right.
    The list goes on.
    If we exercised every right we have to the fullest extent, we'd have no time to do anything else but go around exercising rights all day long, to no purpose.
    Rights are there to be exercised if and when you need them.

  6. #216
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    What do you mean, "is there concrete evidence of morals?"
    Like there's concrete evidence of behaviors and other naturally occuring 'phenomena'.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    There is evidence of "morals" because people espouse them; I'm not sure how you could contend otherwise. That's not proof that they're right or wrong, merely that they exist.
    Quote Originally Posted by EpicDude86 View Post
    A Moral Concept DOES exist. It's an abstract idea. It's been noted and passed on. now is there are concrete evidence of morals? Eh...not really, 'cept for those who choose to practice morality.
    I think we're saying something similar here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Natural rights theory is simply a moral affirmation of an innate desire to live in accordance with one's will. Natural rights are NOT invisible force fields that are supposed to protect you from all transgressions. It's a moral concept that is justified by a set of biological and psychological axioms.
    It's still a theory, created by man's mind. But yeah, I see where you're going with this.

  7. #217
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

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

    Quote Originally Posted by 1069 View Post
    Well, fine.
    I can just as easily come up with a handful of other examples, without even trying very hard.
    I have the right to own a gun; I choose not to exercise this right.
    Many people have the right to vote and choose not to- I think that in an average election year, less than 60% of eligible voters actually vote. This last election, it was a little more. 66%, maybe?
    People in the US have the right not to be physically assaulted, but some of them choose to enter into consensual S&M relationships and voluntarily forfeit this right.
    The list goes on.
    If we exercised every right we have to the fullest extent, we'd have no time to do anything else but go around exercising rights all day long, to no purpose.
    Rights are there to be exercised if and when you need them.
    But my point is these are all man made things. Most of society has agreed upon, and built on to, these codes because they don't exist naturally, or they are hard to determine without having some sort of guidelines. Ever read Lord of the Flies? It's kind of an example of the vice-versa. IN the book some boys end up stranded on an island without adults. The boys subsequently are without any enforced moral code (no adults to tell them what to do), though some of them still exercise the morality they were taught (behaving, not throwing rocks, etc.), the others revert to 'instinct' and acting, well...like little boys. Kinda a roundabout example I know. But it's the only thing i've got at the moment. I'm balancing too many threads lol.

  8. #218
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    10-26-10 @ 06:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,978

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

    Like there's concrete evidence of behaviors and other naturally occuring 'phenomena'.
    "Morals" are a social construct.
    They are something we evolved to allow us to live together in groups; to allow for there to be tribes, communities, civilizations.
    They are all based on the law of reciprocity ("Do unto others", Golden Rule, etc), and have their origin in prehistoric times, and are more or less universal: common to every nation and culture. Without reciprocity-based "morals" or rules, cultures don't last long enough to be more than a blip on the radar of history.

  9. #219
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

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

    Quote Originally Posted by 1069 View Post
    "Morals" are a social construct.
    They are something we evolved to allow us to live together in groups; to allow for there to be tribes, communities, civilizations.
    They are all based on the law of reciprocity ("Do unto others", Golden Rule, etc), and have their origin in prehistoric times, and are more or less universal: common to every nation and culture. Without reciprocity-based "morals" or rules, cultures don't last long enough to be more than a blip on the radar of history.
    Yeah I was trying to say show me naturally occurrences of morality as opposed to man-made/man-inspired ones. We're in agreement I believe.

  10. #220
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    No, I want evidence that this so-called moral concept is factually true. You can believe there are monkeys coming out of your butt, I'm not going to take you seriously until you can validate your belief.

    Otherwise, it's just a bunch of mindless, fanatical handwaving nonsense.
    How does one prove a moral concept to be "factually true"? Can you prove that raping children is "factually immoral"?

Page 22 of 38 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... 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
  •