Or be a faggot

One of the two

nah, the problem is not comiting yourself to ideas, the problem is this particular set of *soy* ideas.

And pray tell what is a non soy set of ideas?

I mean I'm mostly meming to get an angry Mutt reaction, but I do object to the idea of rights being inherent to persons. Less on the grounds of it being 'soy' and more on the grounds of it being a fallacious description of the human condition.

Do you mean practically or philosophically?

If philosophy does not work in practice it is worthless

so both

The founders mean that over history people have rights that they have to have or they Rebel.

Without an effective dictatorship

I don;t care what you think your mythical founders thought, pls tell me what u think.

this lady 👌

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFum-SxmMTI&list=PLMNj_r5bccUwL7KLNrz7dJyYJLx5sTzs0&index=7

Meh moly

I think that you must have certain rights or you have no rights

For example

A right to a weapon means a right to self defense means a right to life.

rights arent rights if they can just be taken away

@Boop / 브파 / C'thUwU not true

That would be inherent rights

Most rights can be taken away

then they arent rights

theyre privilages

a right is something that cant be taken away

Ever hear of civil rights? Not civil privileges.

the fundamental thing of civil rights is that people are created equal

In a day and age with slavery

Rights not privileges

slaves didnt have rights taken away

they gained them

thats different

Equal?

Was every person a slave?

How can you gain rights?

If you cannot lose them?

its a good question

i dont have the words to exactly answer that

i still think it is different, maybe to do with natural right vs law given rights

but i cant at the moment formulate the right words so you got me there

Slaves weren't considered people, thus didn't have a person's rights.

But they became people