Do Natural Rights Actually Exist?

[dblack]

The stuff about preserving freedom. Objectively, the law is about bringing to bear collective force.

Hmm... Okay. So what?

 

[Curried Goats]

Hmm... Okay. So what?

I get that you don't care that you can't form coherent arguments around property and force but I find it amusing.

 

[dblack]

I get that you don't care that you can't form coherent arguments around property and force but I find it amusing.

I don't care about your vague trolling, that's for sure.

 

[Curried Goats]

I don't care about your vague trolling, that's for sure.

You also don't care about making coherent arguments as your arguments regarding property show.

 

[dblack]

You also don't care about making coherent arguments as your arguments regarding property show.

Mkay

 

[Curried Goats]

Mkay

It's right there for everyone to see.

 

[Mister Iggy]

Only an ego would think natural rights exist.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The US Constitution was the most progressive document in history. Too bad it means nothing now.

It's an Elitist Manifesto That Took Away the Common People's Right to Self-Determination

 

[dblack]

It's an Elitist Manifesto That Took Away the Common People's Right to Self-Determination

ie "Eat the rich!"

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Slavery next to murder is about the absolute objectively worse way to preserve freedom and liberty. Do the Founders the decency of not fantasizing about what they wanted and let's simply speak the objective truth of their actions which was liberty for themselves and advantage over others.

Slavery Was Punishment. Savages Needed to Be Tamed.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

ie "Eat the rich!"

There Is No Natural Right to Inheritance. The OP Didn't Dare Say There Was.

Which rich? It's dishonest, slavish, and unAmerican to ignore unearned inheritance. In the 1%, those who were born in the 1% are represented 20 times more than they logically should be. That has to imply that the RichKid Reich controls who else can get to the top.

Your Constitution-banging reply reveals that you know the Constitution was written for them and not for us, no matter how many times they tell it was for us, the people. Worshiping that document is the result of their totalitarian mind-control. No one anywhere on the specious spectrum opposes it. They all quibble about its interpretation, not its right to rule over us like a theocracy.

 

[Dismantle this Country]

Of course they do.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Do Natural Rights Actually Exist? If they do not then it's all intellectual bs. If they do, what are they? Can and do people who believe natural rights actually exist, agree on them -- what they are and are not?

I often see things similar to this Wikipedia entry:
Natural rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government, and so are universal, fundamental and inalienable (they cannot be repealed by human laws, though one can forfeit their enjoyment through one's actions, such as by violating someone else's rights).

Do natural rights trump laws? If so...

They "exist" because we say they exist. Nothing more. If humans die, these rights die.

 

[save the statues]

Do Natural Rights Actually Exist? If they do not then it's all intellectual bs. If they do, what are they? Can and do people who believe natural rights actually exist, agree on them -- what they are and are not?

I often see things similar to this Wikipedia entry:
Natural rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government, and so are universal, fundamental and inalienable (they cannot be repealed by human laws, though one can forfeit their enjoyment through one's actions, such as by violating someone else's rights).

Do natural rights trump laws? If so...

I would amend that to say that natural rights are not dependent on ordinances or statutes of any governmental body. In other words, statutes are different from law.

There are no new "laws" on the books. Law precedes man. It's not as if we suddenly realized that murder is wrong and we passed code against it.

 

[save the statues]

They "exist" because we say they exist. Nothing more. If humans die, these rights die.

They exist because we recognize they exist.

 

[dblack]

They exist because we recognize they exist.

They exist because we have volition.

 

[Leo123]

Do Natural Rights Actually Exist? If they do not then it's all intellectual bs. If they do, what are they? Can and do people who believe natural rights actually exist, agree on them -- what they are and are not?

I often see things similar to this Wikipedia entry:
Natural rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government, and so are universal, fundamental and inalienable (they cannot be repealed by human laws, though one can forfeit their enjoyment through one's actions, such as by violating someone else's rights).

Do natural rights trump laws? If so...

'Natural rights"

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Do natural rights trump laws? If so...

Yes, they are all the rights you would have if you were living on a island in the middle of nowhere all by yourself.

 

[dblack]

Yes, they are all the rights you would have if you were living on a island in the middle of nowhere all by yourself.

Exactly. And the job of government, according to Declaration of Independence, is to secure those rights when there's more than on person on the island.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Exactly. And the job of government, according to Declaration of Independence, is to secure those rights when there's more than on person on the island.

which is the challenge, as soon as there is more than one person on the island the rights start to interfere with each other.