Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    27 Jun '12 14:42
    Okay, let's do this once and for all.

    You have the right to:

    - be free from interference from others as long as you are not hurting others

    - raise your children as you see fit, as long as you are doing so reasonably (yes, I know that "reasonably" can be defined differently by different people, but I mean it in a very broad sense)

    - be free from government interference except when necessary to achieve legitimate government interests

    - etc.


    Here's what you do NOT have a right to:

    - A job. You don't get to force your services on someone if they don't want your services.

    - A "living wage." You don't get to extract someone else's money for your unwanted services.

    - Free or "affordable" healthcare. If healthcare grew on trees or floated in the air, that would be one thing. But it doesn't. Somebody else has to provide that healthcare. Someone has to get training in medicine and give you his or her time. Someone has to work at the pharmaceutical company to produce that drug. That person does not owe you his or her time or services free of charge.

    - Affordable housing. Somebody else owns the building. You don't have the right to enjoy somebody’s else’s property without pay what they demand for it.

    - A free education. Again, an education doesn’t just spontaneously arise. Someone has the build the school. Someone has to get the training and give you his or her time to give you the education. You don’t have the right to force someone else to work for you for free.

    Now, it certainly is a legitimate government function to try and provide these things for people without means to do so themselves, though of course government should do so carefully and fairly where possible. But does anyone have a right to demand these things as a matter of right on par with freedom from oppression? I say absolutely not.
  2. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    It's only business
    27 Jun '12 15:39
    Originally posted by sh76
    Okay, let's do this once and for all.

    You have the [b]right
    to:

    - be free from interference from others as long as you are not hurting others

    - raise your children as you see fit, as long as you are doing so reasonably (yes, I know that "reasonably" can be defined differently by different people, but I mean it in a very broad sense)

    - be free fr ...[text shortened]... gs as a matter of right on par with freedom from oppression? I say absolutely not.[/b]
    Incorrect. There is right to property and it's not based on what the government defines as property.

    You have a right to your home (even if you pay rent!).

    The following is incorrect, as a study of property rights theory will show:

    You don't have the right to enjoy somebody’s else’s property without pay what they demand for it.

    If you live there, it's yours, even if the government insists it belongs to someone else.

    http://athousandyoung.blogspot.com/2010/01/right-to-own-property.html
  3. 27 Jun '12 15:49
    Originally posted by sh76
    Okay, let's do this once and for all.

    You have the [b]right
    to:

    - be free from interference from others as long as you are not hurting others

    - raise your children as you see fit, as long as you are doing so reasonably (yes, I know that "reasonably" can be defined differently by different people, but I mean it in a very broad sense)

    - be free fr ...[text shortened]... gs as a matter of right on par with freedom from oppression? I say absolutely not.[/b]
    IYO?
  4. 27 Jun '12 16:09
    If you live there, it's yours, even if the government insists it belongs to someone else.
    The practical effects of one who made such a ridiculous claim would likely be detrimental.
  5. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    It's only business
    27 Jun '12 16:17
    Originally posted by quackquack
    The practical effects of one who made such a ridiculous claim would likely be detrimental.
    The government recognizes that what I say is true. If my landlord kicks in my door at 2 in the morning and I shoot him I don't go to prison.
  6. 27 Jun '12 16:18
    What does it matter whether or not you call sound policies "rights"?
  7. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    It's only business
    27 Jun '12 16:20
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    What does it matter whether or not you call sound policies "rights"?
    You still don't understand what rights are.
  8. 27 Jun '12 16:21
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    You still don't understand what rights are.
    I know what they aren't - "Natural".
  9. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    It's only business
    27 Jun '12 16:25
    From Rudyard Kipling's [i]The Jungle Book:

    "Now this is the Law of the Jungle—as old and as true as the sky;

    And the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die.

    As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk, the Law runneth forward and back;

    For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack."
  10. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    It's only business
    27 Jun '12 16:28
    THUG LIFE rule #16:

    Attacking someone’s home where their family is known to reside, must be altered or checked.

    http://www.mutulushakur.com/thuglife.html
  11. 27 Jun '12 17:06
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    The government recognizes that what I say is true. If my landlord kicks in my door at 2 in the morning and I shoot him I don't go to prison.
    The government simply does not allow any remedy.

    If you live on someone else's property you can be charged with tresspass. If they go to court you will be evicted.
  12. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    It's only business
    27 Jun '12 17:14 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by quackquack
    The government simply does not allow any remedy.

    If you live on someone else's property you can be charged with tresspass. If they go to court you will be evicted.
    The existence of natural rights is seen when civilians start shooting people or otherwise killing them. For example, that man who punched to death the dude who was raping his kid. That man's actions showed that his daughter had certain rights that were being violated and so the violator must be killed. That's natural law; that's what natural rights are.

    The government can and does trample on peoples' rights. As Americans we are very familiar with this concept are we not? It is central to our identity to embrace the fact that governments which violate rights can and should be violently overthrown.

    Landlords calling in the government to enforce collection of rent checks has very little to do with natural rights. What civilians are killing people in such scenarios?

    The only civilians pulling guns in those situations are the people being evicted.

    http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/07/12105689-man-facing-eviction-is-shot-after-firing-at-police?lite

    THUG LIFE rule #11. The Boys in Blue [i.e. police] don’t run nothing; we do. Control the Hood, and make it safe for squares.
  13. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    27 Jun '12 18:14 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by kevcvs57
    IYO?
    http://tinyurl.com/7m5rf

  14. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    27 Jun '12 18:16
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    What does it matter whether or not you call sound policies "rights"?
    The difference is whether the people have the moral authority to demand them.
  15. 27 Jun '12 20:18
    Originally posted by sh76
    Okay, let's do this once and for all.

    You have the [b]right
    to:

    - be free from interference from others as long as you are not hurting others

    - raise your children as you see fit, as long as you are doing so reasonably (yes, I know that "reasonably" can be defined differently by different people, but I mean it in a very broad sense)

    - be free fr ...[text shortened]... gs as a matter of right on par with freedom from oppression? I say absolutely not.[/b]
    To demand as a right, the product of another's labor without compensation is the same as slavery.