The idea of rights are created by humans. Without humans there would be no idea of rights just like there would be no such thing as freedom. Both are man-made concepts that mean nothing in the bigger picture. Why? Because natural rights and freedom are abstract concepts.

If you take away gravity, the entire universe would fall apart. If take way natural rights, nothing will change except in the human world.

Radar, a lot of things will cross the gray zone because almost everything will affect someone else. Do I have the right to use electricity because it creates pollution that will kill people with respitory problems? Do I have the right to make as much money as possible even though that may keep other people in poverty and they may die because of that? Do animals have natural rights since we are all animals and we are no more evolved then anything else, but just took a different path?

Humans didn't invent natural rights, they only described them. The cave men with no written language and limited ability to convey complex thought, still had rights, even though they couldn't conceptualize them.

Been quite a while.

I agree. While I don't necessarily agree with everything you've said, you've presented rational points of view without any value judgements or UG/merc-type slur...

never mind...
Now why did you have to go there? Like I said, I don't agree with you, but didn't say anything was ridiculous. :mad:

I'm from The USA. Born and bred. Some of us believe in human rights - plenty of Americans don't.

I don't think rights "exist" as though they would be there even if no humans existed - they are not stand-alone. They are societal conventions, agreed upon by civilizations. The deer that wakes up doesn't think about what it is allowed to do any more than the wolf does. But by your definition, the wolf infringes on the rights of the deer when it eats the deer. If these rights were "pre-existing", they would supercede "might makes right" wouldn't they?

Where do laws come into your philosophy? If someone tries to steal your car, you feel entitled to kill the person. What about due process? The legal system? Is each person their own judge, jury, and executioner, interpreting their own set of "unwritten laws"? This would make for an anxiety-filled society, where no one knows exactly how to behave, because one person's interpretation of "unwritten laws" will be different than another person's, and breaking those "unwritten laws" could get you killed.

1. Humans didn't invent rights. They always existed, and humans merely discovered them in much the same way they discovered gravity. Rights are not "abstract concepts" or an idea. They are a tangible reality.

2. The human world is the world we live in. One could easily argue that without humans the universe would cease to exist entirely. It's the old tree falling with nobody around to hear it thing. If nobody existed with the cognitive ability to comprehend the universe, would it even exist? Without any humans alive on earth, there would still be human rights. There just wouldn't be any humans to exercise them.

3. I didn't say we can't do things that "effect" other people, I said we can't do things that violate the person, property, or rights of non-consenting others.

4. Creating electricity does not necessarily create pollution or respiratory problems in others. You don't have the right to pollute because it is a trespass onto the property of others.

5. Your making of wealth does nothing to keep others poor or cause them to die.

6. Humans alone have natural human rights. We are above all other creatures due to our higher level of sentience, and our ability to reason and to think outside of ourselves.

Actually no. There are no people in America that don't believe in rights, and that includes you. If I tried to kill you, you'd say that you have the right to live. Without rights, you would have no right to complain if I did try to kill you anymore than you would complain about another natural occurance like the rain.

You complain about an "anxiety-filled society" without written laws, but the truth is without rights we'd have no laws and I could enslave you, rape you, rob you, and murder you without fear of retaliation because you have no right to your life, your person, or your possessions. Most would have less anxiety if they knew the only law was that no person could violate the person, property, or rights of others than to live in the "society" where rights aren't recognized that you've described.

Society has no rights. Only individuals do, and they got these rights the moment they were born. Rights don't come from societal conventions or agreements. Rights can't be bought, sold, traded, taken, or given away.

Actually, yes. If you tried to kill me, your actions say that you don't believe in those rights. You would be the one who doesn't believe.

I'm not saying there are no rights, I'm saying rights are rules that a society agrees to.

Wait, didn't you say that laws only limit rights? Now you're saying rights are the basis of laws? You're confusing me. Do laws protect my rights, or limit my rights?

Uncertainty causes anxiety. Without precisely understood rules, people will be uncertain, and therefore anxious.

But what do you mean by "violate"? That's where trouble begins. I might feel that my rights are being violated if you yell obscenities at me from your yard - if my "stuff" is an extesion of my "person", then my reputation, self-esteem, and pride are an even closer extension of my person. Can I kill someone for yelling, since my interpretation is that they are "stealing" my pride?

I didn't say rights aren't recognized.

I disagree. What you're describing sounds like Original Sin to me. Some kind of mystical aura that surrounds us. It's not. We're born with a biological imperitive for survival of our species. We would kill, rape, steal, do whatever it takes to ensure the continuation of our species, if left to ourselves. It's only through interaction with other civilized people that we form conventions that serve to improve the chances of species survival better than we could individually. These convention are rights, morals, mores, laws, courtesies, - whatever you want to call them.

I've broken it down to a level even a child can understand, but in your case, I'll break it down further. You own yourself. Because you own your mind, you have the right to think freely. Because you own your voice, you have the right to express yourself freely. Because you own your labor, you also own the fruits of your labor. You own yourself and no other person or group of people calling themselves "government" or "society" has any claim to you or your labor. Nor do they have any legitimate authority to prevent you from doing anything you want as long as your actions do not PHYSICALLY harm, endanger, or violate the person, property, or rights of non-consenting others. A violation of a right would be preventing another person from exercising their rights.

Our rights do not include going through life without being offended or getting your feelings hurt. Nobody can steal your pride. Nobody else controls your pride or self-esteem but yourself.

I haven't described an "aura" or mysticism. I've described the undeniable, factual, and palpable human rights that we are born with and which have nothing to do whatsoever with societal rules or conventions.

You are free to join the ranks of the most heinous sociopaths of history by trying to deny the reality that human rights exist, but these claims merit the same consideration as denying existence of gravity.

We had rights before we had "society".

Nice. If everyone had your negotiation skills, I'd say 'guns for everyone!'


Society in your definition. The first two people who looked at each other had a society of sorts. From that society rose the knowledge "hey if I try to kill and eat him he might kill and eat me. Perhaps we should learn to work together and not go there."

I have been nothing but respectful to you in this thread. I understand what you've said, I just think you're WRONG. I don't think you're stupid, just WRONG. Oh, you're an asshole, too.

You are the one claiming that society makes rules and creates or defines a "concept" of rights. By YOUR definition, society didn't exist until it could make and enforce such rules. This requires some form of government.

If you and I were on an island together, you'd have absolutely no authority to make rules about how I do things, what medicines I take, etc. unless I physically harmed or endangered you. Then you would be justified in using defensive force against me.

Because you don't have any right to tell me whom I may marry, what foods or medicines I may take, etc., neither do 10 of you or 10 million of you or 10 billion of you calling yourself "society" or "government".

Luckily I've got 99.999999999% of the population of the planet earth who agree with me and who know you are WRONG.

As far as your opinion of me goes, I fully support your RIGHT to have that opinion and to express it freely. You're a member of a not so exclusive club of people who share that opinion. It's a good thing my self-respect has nothing to do with your opinion.

Maybe this is why you lost the election.

It was either that or the fact that I had less money and was running in a district that hasn't elected a white person in the last 20+ years and which votes 90% with the Democratic Party against a well-known incumbent.

My guess is the latter. Even with all the odds stacked against me, I got a very respectable 8% of the vote.

How many people have voted for you again?

Don't mind him, radar. Spexxvet was picked last for kickball.