Taking an argument and misrepresenting it to make it easier to attack
That's what you're doing.
Mob rule = rape allowed now?
The question is, if the majority of people wanted something that violates human rights, should the law be changed?
If the majority wanted rape then with mob rule under your rules, rape would be legal
The answer to that is it depends
But generally, yes.
Lmfao
Bruh
Gamer moment
The catch being your meme argument
"It depends"
You aren't really being democratic if you are saying that the people are not allowed to change a certain law
Because that's never going to happen.
If the law violates human rights
That’s the only things jt
Who creates Human Rights?
People do
Nature
And they can take them away
Negative rights
<:WaitWhatArmy:590858815189024778>
Rights aren’t something that’s given to you it’s something natural
Like you have the natural right to free speech
Natural Rights are only a philosophical idea not a legal one
Human Rights are created by humans
You don’t have natural right to free healthcare
Why shouldn’t wearing what you want in public be a human right?
These things you're saying are privileges, not rights.
That’s not a lirgelege
It should be
Privilege
Privilege is free healthcare
But if the people want to get rid of that right they should be able to
Free speech? That's a privilege.
Right is free speech
How is it
There is no such thing as "rights"
I think maybe this is getting off topic
Just because they get taken away doesn’t mean rights don’t exist you idiot
I think the point is, do we want the government to dictate what we can and can't wear?
