What "rights" does nature give us?

[Koios]

Duh, wrong. Society existed prior to government, which is the monopoly on the use of force. Did Indian tribes in the Americas have society? Yes, of course the did, even though they had no government.

It's remarkable to me how liberal thinking revolves entirely around the concept that government is the end-all and be-all of everything desirable in human relations. the degree of their servility is mind-boggling.

Name one.

The Lakota Sioux

Stratified society led by a chieftain, who GOVERNS the tribe!!!!

Fuck me. That's a precursor to Civilizations!!!, with social hierarchies and organized governments!!!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Lions don't have governing bodies, derp.


Is man unnatural to the earth?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Well, if you want to get into sophistry, I'm not saying rights are given to us by government, but rather that they're ones we've given to ourselves. They're not natural. In nature the strongest gets the most food, best territory and any woman he wants. We've decided that we're going to do things a little differently, the solution just happens to be called 'government'. Whether that government is good or bad is a totally different question.

You're still misconstruing the concept. You're fixated on a different meaning of 'natural' that has nothing to do with the philosophical term under discussion.

From the OP:With all this talk about "natural" rights..I was wondering. What are they?

Then answer the OP's question and tell us what those "natural" rights are and how they have any meaning without a government to enforce them.

therein lies the rub...

Human rights are commonly understood as "inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being."[1]

Human rights are thus conceived as universal (applicable everywhere) and egalitarian (the same for everyone). These rights may exist as natural rights or as legal rights, in both national and international law.[2]

The doctrine of human rights in international practice, within international law, global and regional institutions, in the policies of states and in the activities of non-governmental organizations, has been a cornerstone of public policy around the world. The idea of human rights[3] states, "if the public discourse of peacetime global society can be said to have a common moral language, it is that of human rights."

Despite this, the strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke considerable skepticism and debates about the content, nature and justifications of human rights to this day. Indeed, the question of what is meant by a "right" is itself controversial and the subject of continued philosophical debate.

Human rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[bripat9643]

Absurd. Polities are what created societies, where rights became laws of the land (read: were created.)

Duh, wrong. Society existed prior to government, which is the monopoly on the use of force. Did Indian tribes in the Americas have society? Yes, of course the did, even though they had no government.

It's remarkable to me how liberal thinking revolves entirely around the concept that government is the end-all and be-all of everything desirable in human relations. the degree of their servility is mind-boggling.

They had chiefs and elders. If you went against them, there'd be hell to pay. That's 'government' in my book.

Chiefs had no ability to force their decisions on anyone. Social pressure is the only leverage that a Chief had over anyone in the tribe. That isn't government. Any institution that can rightly be called a "government" as the ability to use lethal force against those who refuse to comply with its dictates. That's the definition of what government is. In other words, government is indistinguishable from a criminal gang.

I'm not being servile. I just don't see government as "the other"; I see it as "us".

That's the ultimate in servility. Government is not "us." It's a gang of men separate and distinct from the "us" who aren't part of the government. If government was "us," I wouldn't be paying for your welfare check.

 

[Sallow]

Duh, wrong. Society existed prior to government, which is the monopoly on the use of force. Did Indian tribes in the Americas have society? Yes, of course the did, even though they had no government.

It's remarkable to me how liberal thinking revolves entirely around the concept that government is the end-all and be-all of everything desirable in human relations. the degree of their servility is mind-boggling.

They had chiefs and elders. If you went against them, there'd be hell to pay. That's 'government' in my book.

Chiefs had no ability to force their decisions on anyone. Social pressure is the only leverage that a Chief had over anyone in the tribe. That isn't government. Any institution that can rightly be called a "government" as the ability to use lethal force against those who refuse to comply with its dictates. That's the definition of what government is. In other words, government is indistinguishable from a criminal gang.

I'm not being servile. I just don't see government as "the other"; I see it as "us".

That's the ultimate in servility. Government is not "us." It's a gang of men separate and distinct from the "us" who aren't part of the government. If government was "us," I wouldn't be paying for your welfare check.

You folks have some really far out ideas.

 

[Murf76]

Actually.

I invite you to do just that.

It's not me that wants to wage war, restrict freedom of speech and make laws allowing dolts with guns to shoot people because of a perceived threat.

That would be you folks.

And you do this while at the same time wanting to tear down democratic institutions and forever put in it's place fascism or theocracy or both.

We Americans like our government. We like our Democratic institutions.

And you Monarchists, Theocrats, Fascists, Oligarchists and every other nonsensical Conservative form of government are invited to take your bull and start a new nation.

Islands for Sale Worldwide - Private Islands Online

Awesome. You idiots never fail to be consistent.

Note that WE are not the ones who believe that the NATURAL RIGHTS of human beings don't exist, or that the U.S. Constitution which guarantees them should be set aside. WE are not the ones who believe that Mob Rule should subordinate the inherent rights of the minority. So, who are you calling "fascist", Fascist?
The very fact that you started this particular thread is proof that you don't understand WHY people should be free. This country was founded on OUR philosophy, not yours. You don't have any right to usurp our Liberty and they claim that WE are bothering YOU. Our whole ideology is about "leaving other people alone". It's you assholes who can't manage to DO IT.

"Your' Philosophy?

The only thing consistent with your philosophy, Fascist, that was part of the founding..was slavery. That and that women should not vote and white christians rule the roost.

Those things were changed.

It's not the same country anymore..which is why I showed you the way out.

Black folk aren't slaves, women can vote and anyone can be in power.

Your "leaving other people alone" crapola ceased when you folks attacked Iraq.

I did not personally attack Iraq, nor did I make the decision for someone else to attack Iraq. But how predictable that you should choose, just like every so-called liberal always does, to deflect to some bit of nonsense when you can't defend your point?

No one has said that the philosophy behind this country's founding was always implemented to perfection. But it is a philosophy which is timeless and presents the BEST course for human civilization. What's truly remarkable is the lengths you assholes will go to in order to create the tyranny you desire, that you're willing to throw away your own unalienable rights in order to subordinate the rights of other citizens. Your thirst to enslave your neighbor outweighs your own sense of self-preservation. You'd put your own children's heads in the yoke, so long as you could put your neighbor's kids there as well. It's insane.

 

[bripat9643]

Name one.

The Lakota Sioux

Stratified society led by a chieftain, who GOVERNS the tribe!!!!

Nope. Chiefs never governed. They gave advice only, and the tribes took the advice because the Chiefs were considered to be the wisest members of the tribe. No Chief ever had the power to use force to compel any member of the tribe to do anything.

Fuck me. That's a precursor to Civilizations!!!, with social hierarchies and organized governments!!!

"Society" and "civilization" are two separate things.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Some rights are. The kind you start out with before there is any such thing as a government or society.

You seem to have a fundamental misconception about the concept of 'natural rights'. To be fair, there's plenty of confusion to go around, as lots of people have glommed on to the idea and used it incorrectly. It's interesting to read about if you have time.



That's a good point. Because we do need government to protect our rights, and that something that gets glossed over by more extreme libertarian arguments. The thing is, that's not the same thing as government 'giving' us our rights and that's the entire point of citing 'inalienable' rights in the Constitution. They did that specifically to reject the previously held notion that rights (aka freedom) is a grant from the state or the king. It may seem like subtle sophistry, but it's actually an important shift in perspective. It sets government our servant assigned with a specific task - protecting our pre-existing rights - rather than our master, extending us rights as gifts.

Well, if you want to get into sophistry, I'm not saying rights are given to us by government, but rather that they're ones we've given to ourselves. They're not natural. In nature the strongest gets the most food, best territory and any woman he wants. We've decided that we're going to do things a little differently, the solution just happens to be called 'government'. Whether that government is good or bad is a totally different question.

That's what natural rights signify. That you own yourself. That you are your own king, not the subject of another.

Is this not natural? Is man an unatural being to this planet? Is that your argument?

And as for the biggest ge4ts the best, it's wrong. We're not barbarians. Strength is a versatile attribute in man. Some are strong in physical brute force, while others are cunning and can out smart that brute.

It's not that simple for man. We're not instinctive mammals. We're intelligent, rational beings. Well, some of us anyway.

So, is man unatural to the Earth? Is that the argument here? That man's assertion of the natural right to own himself and the fruits of his labor is an unnatural principle? That only governing bodies within a societal construct can decide who has any "right" to anything not described by the governing body?

 

[Sallow]

Lions don't have governing bodies, derp.


Is man unnatural to the earth?

Except..they do.

Lion Pride - Definition of Lion Pride

 

[Dreamy]

With all this talk about "natural" rights..I was wondering. What are they?

My view:

They are birthrights bestowed by God for those who believe and by birth for those who do not. They are universal to all human beings and government law exists to protect them.

 

[Koios]

1. Lions don't have governing bodies, derp.


2. Is man unnatural to the earth?

1. In prides, typically 2 to 4 males run the joint, and male cubs are excluded when they reach maturity.

2. Man is part of the same set of events that lead to all life on the planet, sharing a common ancestor with all septipods, most likely.

 

[Sallow]

Awesome. You idiots never fail to be consistent.

Note that WE are not the ones who believe that the NATURAL RIGHTS of human beings don't exist, or that the U.S. Constitution which guarantees them should be set aside. WE are not the ones who believe that Mob Rule should subordinate the inherent rights of the minority. So, who are you calling "fascist", Fascist?
The very fact that you started this particular thread is proof that you don't understand WHY people should be free. This country was founded on OUR philosophy, not yours. You don't have any right to usurp our Liberty and they claim that WE are bothering YOU. Our whole ideology is about "leaving other people alone". It's you assholes who can't manage to DO IT.

"Your' Philosophy?

The only thing consistent with your philosophy, Fascist, that was part of the founding..was slavery. That and that women should not vote and white christians rule the roost.

Those things were changed.

It's not the same country anymore..which is why I showed you the way out.

Black folk aren't slaves, women can vote and anyone can be in power.

Your "leaving other people alone" crapola ceased when you folks attacked Iraq.

I did not personally attack Iraq, nor did I make the decision for someone else to attack Iraq. But how predictable that you should choose, just like every so-called liberal always does, to deflect to some bit of nonsense when you can't defend your point?

No one has said that the philosophy behind this country's founding was always implemented to perfection. But it is a philosophy which is timeless and presents the BEST course for human civilization. What's truly remarkable is the lengths you assholes will go to in order to create the tyranny you desire, that you're willing to throw away your own unalienable rights in order to subordinate the rights of other citizens. Your thirst to enslave your neighbor outweighs your own sense of self-preservation. You'd put your own children's heads in the yoke, so long as you could put your neighbor's kids there as well. It's insane.

I've defended my point, fine, fascist.

The folks you put into place, elected by you folks..don't ever leave people alone.

Never.

 

[Koios]

Lions don't have governing bodies, derp.


Is man unnatural to the earth?

Except..they do.

Lion Pride - Definition of Lion Pride

Oops. Beat me to it. LOL

 

[Sallow]

With all this talk about "natural" rights..I was wondering. What are they?

My view:

They are birthrights bestowed by God for those who believe and by birth for those who do not. They are universal to all human beings and government law exists to protect them.

Nothing..nadda..zilch..bupkiss..supports that except "faith".

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Lions don't have governing bodies, derp.


Is man unnatural to the earth?

Except..they do.

Lion Pride - Definition of Lion Pride

Then governments are not necessary for a civilized society. Keep trollin', bud. And keep tackling the tough questions.

 

[jillian]

Nope. Chiefs never governed. They gave advice only, and the tribes took the advice because the Chiefs were considered to be the wisest members of the tribe. No Chief ever had the power to use force to compel any member of the tribe to do anything.

i doubt you're correct. and given that you've provided no link, i'll assume you aren't.

as for them being their "own people", then the europeans came and obliterated them. how'd those 'natural rights' work out for them?

"Society" and "civilization" are two separate things.

might be...

living in the wild west with everyone shooting at each other is uncivilized.

not taking care of our poorest and weakest and sickest and oldest is uncivilized.

oh wait...

 

[Koios]

The Lakota Sioux

Stratified society led by a chieftain, who GOVERNS the tribe!!!!

Nope. Chiefs never governed. They gave advice only, and the tribes took the advice because the Chiefs were considered to be the wisest members of the tribe. No Chief ever had the power to use force to compel any member of the tribe to do anything.

Fuck me. That's a precursor to Civilizations!!!, with social hierarchies and organized governments!!!

"Society" and "civilization" are two separate things.

So braves went off to war with other tribes willy-nilly and chiefs who pow-wow'ed in the big tent were just checking with each other on what advice they might offer THEIR tribes, ya think, moron???

 

[Sallow]

The Lakota Sioux

Stratified society led by a chieftain, who GOVERNS the tribe!!!!

Nope. Chiefs never governed. They gave advice only, and the tribes took the advice because the Chiefs were considered to be the wisest members of the tribe. No Chief ever had the power to use force to compel any member of the tribe to do anything.

Fuck me. That's a precursor to Civilizations!!!, with social hierarchies and organized governments!!!

"Society" and "civilization" are two separate things.

gov·ern·ment

/ˈgəvər(n)mənt/

Noun

1.The governing body of a nation, state, or community.
2.The system by which a nation, state, or community is governed.

Work with that.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Well, if you want to get into sophistry, I'm not saying rights are given to us by government, but rather that they're ones we've given to ourselves. They're not natural. In nature the strongest gets the most food, best territory and any woman he wants. We've decided that we're going to do things a little differently, the solution just happens to be called 'government'. Whether that government is good or bad is a totally different question.

That's what natural rights signify. That you own yourself. That you are your own king, not the subject of another.

Is this not natural? Is man an unatural being to this planet? Is that your argument?

And as for the biggest ge4ts the best, it's wrong. We're not barbarians. Strength is a versatile attribute in man. Some are strong in physical brute force, while others are cunning and can out smart that brute.

It's not that simple for man. We're not instinctive mammals. We're intelligent, rational beings. Well, some of us anyway.

So, is man unatural to the Earth? Is that the argument here? That man's assertion of the natural right to own himself and the fruits of his labor is an unnatural principle? That only governing bodies within a societal construct can decide who has any "right" to anything not described by the governing body?

Don't like these questions? What's the matter?

 

[Sallow]

Lions don't have governing bodies, derp.


Is man unnatural to the earth?

Except..they do.

Lion Pride - Definition of Lion Pride

Then governments are not necessary for a civilized society. Keep trollin', bud. And keep tackling the tough questions.

Trolling what?

Governance is necessary to get a group of beings to act communally.

That's pretty basic.

And it can take many forms.