- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 119,584
- Reaction score
- 75,509
- Location
- Outside Seattle
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Independent
here is the irony.. I have explained it to you over and over... and you know what? You have had no rebuttal. You maam are the one that keeps trying to move the goal posts around and trying different arguments.
Kind of funny that you are critiquing my understanding of human biology and evolution since I have degrees in it. Which I have demonstrated.
Nope not really.
Based on the scientific evidence.. the evidence is clear that there is such a thing as natural rights. How we humans arrive at that is not known.. but the fact is.. the evidence is that belief originates not from LAWs or GOVERNMENT but from humans themselves. thus making it "natural".
that's not in any way a faulty belief in biological context. In fact.. I provided the evidence that several good studies show that our perceptions , our beliefs systems, etc.. have a genetic component and can be passed down. That's the scientific evidence.
At the end of the day.. you really can't get around the biological fact that rights don't come from laws, or from governments.. they start with the natural belief that humans have.
Its given us a biological advantage in cooperation the development of societies.
Your explanations are wrong...they are not founded in science. They are not logically connected even tho you believe they are.
I have written it as many ways as possible. There is no such thing as 'naturally occuring inherent' rights. If there is, find the scientific discipline that proves it.
And not a soft science like sociology...'inherent' characteristics are physiological and can be expressed. Your studies didnt actually say that. Again...it's a limitation of your understanding of science.
I'm tired of writing it all. If you disagree, fine but you have not remotely proven that rights are 'natural' to humans. If they were, other animals would have them.