|
Good gravy, Radar. Don't hold back, tell us how you really feel, OK?
The question of "rights" is complex. Are we born with rights by virtue of being human, or is it awarded by the government under which we live?
Enlightenment philosophes would say rights are integral to humanity and that all government is inherently oppressive, by its very nature.
Others, more pragmatically, might say "your rights end where mine begin."
And that is really the purpose of government, isn't it? It's about determining where one person's rights end, and another's begin, and enforcing the balance between the two. Pure, and distilled.
If you are a US resident, you have the "inalienable rights" to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." The First Constitutional Congress (and John Locke) said we should have the right to "life, liberty, and property." And then the Bill of Rights came along to give us some other stuff, like free speech, peaceful assembly, right to bear arms, trial by jury, that kind of thing. Amendments came along giving women the right to vote, etc.
My point, though, is are these all "inalienable rights" or are we just lucky enough to live in a time and place that recognizes them?
What gives you the right to do whatever it is you think you have a right to do? Or who gives you the right?
What is a "right" anyway?
Is it given by God? Whose God? How do you know?
I am not arguing that gays shouldn't be allowed to marry. I said as much. I just think you would be a much better asset to your cause if you had a more logical argument than "we've got the right." 'Cause what you're really saying is "I want this, others want this, and I want more people to agree with us than disagree."
|