[smoothmoniker]

LJ, I think I understand what you're saying. What I'm trying to hit at is that invoking the idea "rights" means you're trying to introduce some governing principle into the interaction between two people. If someone is trying to kill me, saying "you ought not to do that; I have a right to live" and saying "I wish you wouldn't do that" are two very different things, no?

The appeal to "rights" says that something should limit the actions of others, something other than my preference.

If we can agree on that much (I hope I'm not presuming too much), then the next logical question is this: is there any good reason why we should call that external thing "moral"? It sure waddles and quacks like morality.