View Poll Results: I have a "right" to...

Voters
112. You may not vote on this poll
  • Health care

    30 26.79%
  • Food

    35 31.25%
  • Water

    39 34.82%
  • Other people's wealth

    7 6.25%
  • A job

    17 15.18%
  • A minimum or "living" wage

    30 26.79%
  • None of the above

    61 54.46%
  • Other

    26 23.21%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 22 of 35 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 349

Thread: I have a "right" to...

  1. #211
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: I have a "right" to...

    Quote Originally Posted by Iwa View Post
    nobody does. but those are rights upheld by yourself. if you hold onto those, noone can take them away, thats why the death penelty is a controversy, everyone has the right to LIFE liberty and the persuit of happiness.
    The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were just made up by us, that is all. There is nothing inalienable about them.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  2. #212
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: I have a "right" to...

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    What does that have to do with inalienable rights? That is determined by the law of the land, which we made up and can change!
    Just answer the question.

  3. #213
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: I have a "right" to...

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were just made up by us, that is all. There is nothing inalienable about them.
    And yet, you fully buy into the idea that these rights -are- inalienable.
    Explain the dichotomy.

  4. #214
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    Re: I have a "right" to...

    Sure it does.
    That you may never have the means to own a million acres of Maui in no way means your freedom to own eproperty is meaningless.
    No. But it does not extend so far that I will be able to own millions of acres in Maui, like I said.


    No... YOU are confusing them.
    YOU take it to mean a physical capability, not a political or legal capacity as the term is used when related to "freedom" or "liberty".
    Political and legal capability are compartamentalized into physical capability. They are smaller senses in a single larger sense.

    All 'senses' are experential in nature. In reality, only 'physical' things exist.


    On the contrary -- its complete obligation lies in protecting you exercise of your rights from those that would infringe upon them.

    The means for exercising those rights are up to you to provide.
    That's your interpretation of the law. The Supreme Court has not consistently agreed with either of us.


    The protection of that right from others, yes, not that you will have the means to exercise said right.
    The U.S. Constitution only makes that specification in the Second Amendment, to prevent the government from banning possession of firearms. Nowhere else does it make that specification regarding any right, and if it does, it would have to read in its proper context.

    I'd argue that you require that gun regardless, as said security cannot ever exist.
    It has to exist to some extent, or police stations would be pointless; they would never be of any help to anyone in any way.


    No... the most minimal security provision it could make is to ensure that your right to that gun is not infringed upon. The means to obtain that gun are up to you.
    The U.S. Constitution invests the government with the authority and responsibility to ensure domestic peace, one of which is providing me with a weapon when it is unable to provide me with police services. It does not specify anything like what you are saying.
    Last edited by Morality Games; 03-04-10 at 04:47 PM.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  5. #215
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: I have a "right" to...

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    And yet, you fully buy into the idea that these rights -are- inalienable.
    Explain the dichotomy.
    I don't buy into the idea they are inalienable. I maintain the opposite position, that there is nothing inalienable about them.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  6. #216
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: I have a "right" to...

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were just made up by us, that is all. There is nothing inalienable about them.
    So the non-existent right to "health care" is inalienable, and some else's formerly inalienable right to life and property are now discarded if by doing so we can promote Messiahcare.

  7. #217
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: I have a "right" to...

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    No. But it does not extend so far that I will be able to own millions of acres in Maui, like I said.
    You WILL be able to -- if -you- supply the means.
    You have the freedom to do so.
    Political and legal capability are compartamentalized into physical capability. They are smaller senses in a single larger sense.
    Not at all.
    That you do not have the physical capability to march in a political protest in no way means you do not have the political or legal freedom to march in said protest.

    That you do not have a church that youcan atend in no way means that you do not have the political or legal freedom to freely exercise your religion.

    et cetera...
    All 'senses' are experential in nature. In reality, only 'physical' things exist.
    Obviouly not - see above.
    That's your interpretation of the law. The Supreme Court has not consistently agreed with either of us.
    Good thing neither of us rest our position on the supreme court.
    The U.S. Constitution only makes that specification in the Second Amendment, to prevent the government from banning possession of firearms. Nowhere else does it make that specification regarding any right.
    Not just protection from banning, but infringement, period.
    Not sure how you think this applies to what I said.
    It has to exist to some extent, or police stations would be pointless.
    You said "If the government was not able to provide my region with the security detail necessary to ensure the free exercise of my constitutional rights against non-compliants...".

    The government can NEVER supply so much security that 'non compliants' can NEVER act against you, which would b enecessary to "ensure" the free exercise of yoru rights.
    The U.S. Constitution invests the government with the authority and responsibility to ensure domestic peace, one of which is providing me with a weapon when it is unable to provide me with police services.
    Ths is absolutely unsupportable.
    The consitution specifies that it will provide for very few things, and the means for you to maintain your personal protection is not among them. It specifies that the government will 'ensure domestinc tranqulity', a statment was made in a specific context -- to end the sqaubbles amoing the states resulting from the inefficacy of the Articles of Confederation - not related to your argument in any way.

  8. #218
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: I have a "right" to...

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I don't buy into the idea they are inalienable.
    Yes you do.
    Disagree?
    Answer the question:
    What would you think of being forced by the state to attend a church of its choosing?

  9. #219
    Advisor Iwa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Illinois. I wish i lived in a Socialist country.
    Last Seen
    04-25-11 @ 04:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    443

    Re: I have a "right" to...

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were just made up by us, that is all. There is nothing inalienable about them.
    it doesnt matter they still are there by us, for us.
    It's not rape if you scream "SURPRISE" first.

  10. #220
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,774

    Re: I have a "right" to...

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Yes you do.
    Disagree?
    Answer the question:
    What would you think of being forced by the state to attend a church of its choosing?
    In America, it would be wrong because we have determined that we have freedom of religion. In other countries, if they chose to do things differently, that's their business and I'd have no problem with them doing things differently.

    Rights are not inalienable or universal, period.
    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!

Page 22 of 35 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
  •