- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is there such thing as a basic human right?
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:14 am to 4cubbies
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:14 am to 4cubbies
quote:
I'm talking about rights for everyone, not just the people the founders thought worthy.
But if that was the consensus, then according to you, people other than those that the consensus thought worthy actually had no rights.
No rights, no violation of rights. No violation of rights, no injustice.
So black people being slaves was not unjust.
1
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:17 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Not unless one believes her soul is mozzarella, tomato paste, and pasta.
It's funny because I argued that dignity is innate and God given and people here clutched their pearls and screamed at the sky. Now many are arguing that God gives everyone the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness because a grtoup of white men wrote this down 300 hundred years ago. If God gives people these rights, do they even matter if they aren't ensured or protected? God doesn't protect these rights on Earth.
I absolutely believe in God and raise my kids to know God. My own personal beliefs (unfortunately) are not reflected by modern American society and certainly not by the government.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:18 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
But if that was the consensus, then according to you, people other than those that the consensus thought worthy actually had no rights.
You disagreed with me using an argument that directly contradicts your own claim, though.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:19 am to BarberitosDawg
quote:
You have to have a manmade construct such as forming a government in order to have rights which are a manmade construct subject to the will of said government.
A right is wish or a thought from which can only be afforded by laws from which come from an authoritarian edict.
My 02c
This is how I view this as well.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:20 am to 4cubbies
quote:
the author argued that housing should be viewed as a human right
The author is a moron
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:20 am to 4cubbies
In most cases, the each right in our constitution does not infringe on the right of another person.
Maybe the 6th and 7th require other citizens to serve on a jury and subsidize the expenses needed for the judicial process but a country without a functioning criminal and civil justice system will fall apart. And citizens are directly compensated for a few days every few years and can get out of it due to hardships.
Maybe the 6th and 7th require other citizens to serve on a jury and subsidize the expenses needed for the judicial process but a country without a functioning criminal and civil justice system will fall apart. And citizens are directly compensated for a few days every few years and can get out of it due to hardships.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:22 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
Anything that someone else has to provide for you is not an inalienable right.
Yes.
The individual does not have a right to reproduce. That requires the cooperation of another individual.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:28 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
So again, if a majority show of hands decided that women shouldn't be able to vote and blacks would be re-enslaved, the that's just the way it is, yeah?
Yeah, this is actual history you're describing.
quote:
No problem, no injustice
I didn't say anything about justice or injustice. Rights are distributed by society, often in a unjust way.
quote:Not at that time. Women did not have the right to vote.
Women not being able to vote was not a violation of their rights.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:29 am to TrueTiger
quote:
Sorry ladies, but no one is afraid of you.
Your wife probably has a different take.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:32 am to 4cubbies
You are a living/breathing/posting argument for the repeal of the 19th Amendment.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:36 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Your wife probably has a different take.
Well, she can always kill me in my sleep.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:45 am to SoFla Tideroller
quote:
You are a living/breathing/posting argument for the repeal of the 19th Amendment.
Women forget that they have the franchise only because men gave them permission.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:46 am to 4cubbies
quote:My recollection is you inexplicably tied dignity to wealth based on what some idiot (who'd be disassembled in 60 seconds of proper debate here) blabbered about to the captured audience in his classroom.
It's funny because I argued that dignity is innate and God given and people here clutched their pearls and screamed at the sky.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:49 am to 4cubbies
It should be a right in as much as you work to earn money to pay for it and therefore, that is your "right" to it.
The only time I'm ok with tax dollars for housing is for severely handicapped people who never had the chance to work at all or were cut short due to no fault of their own or if by luck you have outlived your reasonable amount of retirement funds.
Otherwise, you find work and you pay for your food and housing. Simple enough. In this country, you can always find work.
The only time I'm ok with tax dollars for housing is for severely handicapped people who never had the chance to work at all or were cut short due to no fault of their own or if by luck you have outlived your reasonable amount of retirement funds.
Otherwise, you find work and you pay for your food and housing. Simple enough. In this country, you can always find work.
This post was edited on 3/18/25 at 9:51 am
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:53 am to 4cubbies
quote:This is one of the practical issues tied up with the rejection of God as our creator and law-giver. It makes morality entirely subjective, as well as human value and dignity and the rights that stem from that dignity.
Yeah, this is actual history you're describing.
I didn't say anything about justice or injustice. Rights are distributed by society, often in a unjust way.
It makes these moral issues entirely subjective and puts them in the hands of those with the power to do as they please without any basis for moral impunity, which goes against our own instincts. We know some things are "wrong", but we have no rational basis for saying anything is "wrong" under this relativistic paradigm, except perhaps to go against those who make the rules.
For instance, if what is moral is that which is in agreement with the majority, then it would stand to reason that to fight against that agreement (to protest, lobby, or even to discuss and attempt to convince others to the contrary) would be definitionally "immoral" (at least according to that paradigm).
Living according to God's moral law as summarized in the 10 commandments gives us an objective standard to use to determine what human rights we should be protecting and defending, and it gives us an unchanging standard we can apply wisdom to in order to make meaningful moral judgements (moral judgements like praise and condemnation are merely opinions in a subjective moral paradigm).
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:58 am to 4cubbies
The only true right is the right to be left alone. This is unalienable and God given.
Natural rights are extensions of that core right bc they don’t require the actions, time, money, etc of other people in order for you to exercise them. You don’t need to violate the right of others to be left alone for you to exercise your right to be left alone.
No one else needs to do anything for you to speak your mind, for you to practice your religion, for you to possess guns, for you to publish literature, etc.
Other people’s actions, time, and money are required for you to have your own housing, for you to get medical care, for you to have food. Other people need to provide those services to you. If no one is willing to provide those services, then it would be a violation of their right to be left alone if they are forced to provide them to you. Therefore, they are not neutral rights.
If a government alleges that you committed a crime, you are due legal rights—an attorney, a fair trial, humane treatment, etc. Those are legal rights that apply when a government is trying to restrict your right to be left alone bc of alleged crimes. Those aren’t natural rights; those are legal rights afforded to you by a government when the government seeks to limit your natural rights.
Natural rights are extensions of that core right bc they don’t require the actions, time, money, etc of other people in order for you to exercise them. You don’t need to violate the right of others to be left alone for you to exercise your right to be left alone.
No one else needs to do anything for you to speak your mind, for you to practice your religion, for you to possess guns, for you to publish literature, etc.
Other people’s actions, time, and money are required for you to have your own housing, for you to get medical care, for you to have food. Other people need to provide those services to you. If no one is willing to provide those services, then it would be a violation of their right to be left alone if they are forced to provide them to you. Therefore, they are not neutral rights.
If a government alleges that you committed a crime, you are due legal rights—an attorney, a fair trial, humane treatment, etc. Those are legal rights that apply when a government is trying to restrict your right to be left alone bc of alleged crimes. Those aren’t natural rights; those are legal rights afforded to you by a government when the government seeks to limit your natural rights.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 10:09 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
Any particular reason you're being such a jerk about this?
I'm sorry. That was snarky.
I'm frustrated that I am not articulating my thought clearly. I do know what people wrote down and claimed in those historical documents, but what do people think now? I want to hear what people think, not what they can tell me other people thought hundreds of years ago. I do apologize for being rude.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 11:17 am to 4cubbies
quote:
You disagreed with me using an argument that directly contradicts your own claim, though.
No, I disagreed with you and then showed you how your own logic ends up.
That's the "according to you" part.
I don't believe that rights are just something that people make up.
You say you do. O.k., then if that's the case, the logical conclusion of that a priori premise is that it was not unjust for black people to be enslaved.
Which I doubt you agree with.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 11:18 am to 4cubbies
quote:
I'm sorry. That was snarky.
I do apologize for being rude.
No harm, no foul, and I appreciate the apology.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 11:24 am to 4cubbies
There is no such thing as human rights.
Rights are the product of civilized society, and each society is different... you can't even standardize this.
Humans need food, water, shelter, and sex to perpetuate their existence.
How they go about obtaining these things varies based on the environment.
Rights are the product of civilized society, and each society is different... you can't even standardize this.
Humans need food, water, shelter, and sex to perpetuate their existence.
How they go about obtaining these things varies based on the environment.
Page 6 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News