Does it tire you...

Poll - Total Votes: 0

STOP TAKIN' MAH MAGICAL RIGHTS, DANG GUMMINT!!!

I disagree with your conclusions but have no solid foundations for doing so.

Waaah, stop saying bad things about human rights because [insert moralistic fallacy here].

You may vote on multiple answers, up to 3.

Seeing all the posts about gummint tekkin away ur rites? Is anyone still familiar with Jeremy Bentham? Hobbes had to come to the absurd conclusion that in a state of nature you had both all rights and no rights. Bentham said that rights anterior to the creation of government were "nonsense upon stilts". As he put it, want is not desert, hunger is not bread (a refutation prior to its genesis of the best theory of what the foundation of human rights could be, that they stem from human needs - once God was taken out of the equation human rights lacked any metaphysical foundations whatsoever). The thoughtlessness of it pains me. Moreover, if you want to put God back into the equation, please show me in the Bible where rights are granted by God. More moreover, show me how this escapes Bentham's point, since God would be acting as supreme legislator. Government gave you your rights, and the only rights you have are civil rights. I know, I know, there are things you could do on one day that you can't do on subsequent days, and you're all scared of the big bad boogeyman, but please God give up the govt is the antithesis of rights talk, it's irritating nonsense. Instead, make a real case for why something should be a civil right in the first place. Or keep whinging and make some stupid, anti-intellectual remark about practice and life-or-death struggles that somehow obviate the need for explanation and sound argument, as though your personal emotional fixations are all that's needed to win people over to your view of the magic of rights.

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

Gloomy · F

Rights are always something people agree on and then they help build the foundation of a society.
They then are enforced through laws, regulations, etc that organise our societal lives. In that sense a government can take granted rights away.

I don't know what you consider to be a real argument but beyond moralistic arguments (everyone operates within a moral framework so brushing that aside isn't smart or intellectual) we can look at places where for example the Declaration of Human rights is mostly adhered to and places where this doesn't happen and then look how society is doing.
If I want to argue access to medical help should be a right I would point to mortality rates for example.

View 8 more replies »

Alyosha · 31-35, M

@Gloomy I disagree with your position on religion, but I won't get into it too much. As I said, a religious doctrine of rights doesn't escape Jeremy Bentham's point that rights come into being with the creation of government, whatever that government is, howsoever formal or informal. My basic position is, yes, rights apart from civil rights lack metaphysical foundation. Human or natural rights are this species of rights. Typically the word "rights" when used by itself is used in this sense. Civil rights are a creation of society with governance and are sanctioned by the legitimacy of government and backed by force.

Gloomy · F

@Alyosha So you oppose civil rights?
What are natural rights supposed to be?

Alyosha · 31-35, M

@Gloomy No, I don't oppose civil rights. Natural rights or human rights are supposed to be the rights that all sapient beings have, I just don't believe in them.

Persephonee · 22-25, F

I'm really sorry on behalf of my nation because this whole thing you describe and rightly criticise is mostly the result (300 or so years after the fact) of Great Britain exporting 4/5ths of its religious nutjobs

Alyosha · 31-35, M

@Persephonee No joke, madam. Those who couldn't make it in civilized society fled to the frontiers. It wasn't all Walter Raleighs.

Persephonee · 22-25, F

@Alyosha Yeah - anyway we saved the civilised Walter Raleighs for burning down the Spanish bits! 😶

badminton · 61-69, MVIP

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

U.S. Declaration of Independence (Excerpt)

pride49 · 31-35, M

Your atrocious grammar confuses me and gives me a headache. Go away 🥱

Alyosha · 31-35, M

@pride49 Deep.

pride49 · 31-35, M

@Alyosha I like it deep. And raunchy 😏

fakable

equivocation of sophisms
but amusing

View 2 more replies »

Alyosha · 31-35, M

@fakable Your failure to understand is not my problem.

fakable

@Alyosha
nope
you're wrong
you don't understand that I understand that you don't understand that the content of your post lacks a proper logical basis

Alyosha · 31-35, M

@fakable Deep.

MartinTheFirst · 26-30, M

political posts make me tired

Add a comment...