Message from @The Electric Lizard
Discord ID: 637055836971204618
as in the gov can just take them away
we would go a long way to being a freer society
Rights are a good thing but i don't think the idea that they are inmate is correct although it does help to the extent that it stops the Government from infringing on them
It slows overeach
For example
1 rerally bad gov takes away a right
you think any succeeding gov is gonna give you it back?
Fuck no
No matter how "Good" they are
That is a good thing within itself
Power is rarely voluntarily Relinquished
rights aren't a thing, they're a principle
I just personally think that the whole idea of Natural or Innate rights is absurd since all rights are pretty much social inventions
Yes, they are social inventions
That doesn't mean they can serve no purpose
Not really if you think about it
As humans we can speak, it's a thing
at least make noises with our mouths
Stopping that from happening takes intervention
Which means the right to speak (or make random noises if you cant speak words) is innate
However healthcare is not innate
However can be adopted
it isnt a "Tier 1 right"
We are also born with the capacity to kill others and stopping that takes intervention yet i don't think anyone would say that we have a natural right to kill others
That is because we rank rights
You cannot express your rights if they directly impact someone else's innate right to autonomy for example
The right to life is above the right to freely express your murderous desires
For example
I guess
This is why the right to speech ends after you call directly on someone to take action against another
as that right has then negated that other person's right to autonomy
It's also why the abortion argument is difficult
As you have to judge when the foetus gains their humans rights
When does your right to autonomy start infringing on the foetus's right to life
For example
Positive and negative freedoms.
Depends on your point of view.
I see positive as in rights
However not extreme