hahah commie fag

if you don't hold self ownership as a natural right then what is it?

you are addressing abstractions

thank you, that'd be my defensive point.

anyway

ownership like any other 'right' is the function of the agreeement a gov makes with it's people

in exchange for the monopoly on force

Hypotheticals and other situationally egregious arguments (like my favorite, the Burning IVF Clinic) are not reflective of reality and all options you can take.

I don't like them as rhetorical techniques.

Frankly I wish they'd die off.

the condition is to enforce the rights entailed uniformly

so if you are on a deserted location, like in the jungle, with no government around to protect you, do you have no rights?

it's a function of a contract

not something that exists in nature

there is no contract with government

yes there is

lol

So, in your estimate MA, rights - and we're talking life liberty & the pursuit of happiness level - are functionally provided by the Gov't?

it's called a constitution

only the US has that

big cock libertarians enter the chat

they aren' t 'provided'

It's also known as a "social contract."

social contract is not a contract

it doesn't exist

they are a CONDITION

moving goal posts

Thus, are inherent?

if the gov doesn't protect the rights of the people, the people have a responsiblity to REPLACE that gov

the government role is to protect the inalienable rights, they have just taken that way too far

no gov that simply dismisses those rights is legitimate; that's the catch

governments exist to protecc rights

The question is where does the *impetus* of rights derive from then?

but treating the rights like they have no COST or are unconditional will inevitable result in entitlement and thinking they don't require constant vigilance

this perspective will ALWAYS result in LOSING those rights

something given HAS no value

again read Ethics of liberty, all covered in there. https://mises.org/library/introduction-natural-law

So, does life - which is given, but must be protected - have no value?

from an empircal perspective, rights are contractual NOT natural

LMFAO

'natural law' refers to things l ike the Second LAw of Thermo-Dynamics