Message from @Hexidecimark
Discord ID: 603625389637632083
You will either use rights or an analogous system to accomplish this
scope of governmental bodies
if by analogous you mean something like "laws" then yes
the difference is that laws don;t make some claim to universality
Yeet
rights are a decalogue that is mutable
Mental gymnastics cancer
meaning it's not a decalogue
Then consider them laws for government
Because that is what they functionally *are*
cool, but then they are not some special cathegory
Correct
which is my point
All they are is laws
They are just distinct from laws in impact and scale
But they are effectively laws, yes
and laws need justification by some moral imperative
No, they do not
then ur laws are evil by definition
which is rather obviously a problem
I'm calling you incorrect
According to your system of beliefs, sure
morality is the theory of action
some actions are good some are bad
you can argue about lesser evils
and whatnot
but it's pretty clear that the goal is to minimize them and try for the good
But I can pass a law without taking any of this into account
if your laws have no moral justification, they are wither good on accident, or evil
the way republics justify law
being non-evil
is by binding good to the will of the people
saying basically that the ppl is to be the arbiter of good and evil
which is dubious
This is exactly like a pointless discussion a few days ago because morals are subjective
(though practical)
if morality is indeed subjective
then all of this is meaningless
and all there is is Foucault
and power dynamics