Rights are those things that we have naturally that’s immoral for someone else to *take* from us.
They are never things that someone else is obligated to *give* to us.
Discussion
Would you agree, though, that we only actually have the rights we are able to successfully defend?
No, I would put it differently: that we will likely lose the rights we cannot protect. Seems the same statement but it is not, imo —
Your version, that we don’t have them unless we can protect them, holds the implication to absolve the rapist, murderer, or slaver their morally reprehensible actions. It’s to suggest that they didn’t violated our rights, it’s that we didn’t *have* those rights because we couldn’t stop the murderer or rapist. Therefore the evil actions aren’t evil or violating anyone’s rights.
The reverse is the truth. Everyone has those rights naturally, we are given by god, the universe, fundamental existence (whatever we call it). But if we cannot or are unwilling to protect them from evil people, we will lose them when evil knocks on our door. That doesn’t mean we didn’t have them, it just means they are easy to violate unless we understand their nature and do something about it.
In other words, the statement may be true in a practical sense, but the reverse framing is critically important from a moral sense.
Very well put, thank you!
If you will lose the rights you can't protect, then you certainly don't have them without protection. They don't exist in themselves, they exist in your enforcement.
This only absolves the rapist if your entire basis for morality is built on the concept of rights - which concept nature seems to ignore entirely. But the rapist may be guilty for other reasons. Maybe raping is destructive to his own soul.
I realized over 10 years ago that most people (90%) are normies who... simply do not care about such things. Banging my head against a brick wall is more productive than even trying to engage with them. I subconsciously made it my mission to avoid these people.
During the scamdemic, all these people came to the surface, and exposed themselves for all to see. This was a blessing because it made it far easier for the like-minded to find each other.
Love this!
nostr:note1ljd7dfk0q3erzkvva8wfuclcyfctymc0dggumzxpsrf46gschuxss57yks
I wrote an article on this recently. There is a huge difference between rights and permission.
This is why health care, housing, and food can never be rights.
Or that any given right should be considered legitimate
Negative vs positive rights Only negative rights right within a libertarian/freedom mindset.
There is so much confusion around the US Constitution in this regard. Many ppl seem to think that it GIVES us rights, but in fact it just acknowledges that we have natural rights, and limits the power of the state with regard to those natural rights.