Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NMC EXP; .30Carbine; LiberationIT; KrisKrinkle
First off, thanks for posting this, NMC. I agree with the conclusions, but would like for someone to assist me with the premises that get us to those conclusions.

"A right defines what you may do without the permission of those other men and it erects a moral and legal barrier across which they may not cross."

Aren't legal barriers due to laws, rather than rights?

"Alone in a wilderness, the concept of a right would never occur to you... Rights only apply to beings capable of thought, capable of defining rights..."

Is this a contradiction? Why or why not?

"Freedom of speech is the right to say anything you wish..."

Does this include lies? Why or why not?

12 posted on 08/31/2003 12:09:46 PM PDT by Voice in your head ("The secret of Happiness is Freedom, and the secret of Freedom, Courage." - Thucydides)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Voice in your head
Aren't legal barriers due to laws, rather than rights?

In an ideal world all laws would conform to natural rights hence no contradiction.

Is this a contradiction? Why or why not?

No.

Animals do not have rights. Rights apply only to the interactions of men. A solitary man cannot violate the rights of another, or have his rights violated.

Regards

J.R.

34 posted on 08/31/2003 5:07:53 PM PDT by NMC EXP (Choose one: [a] party [b] principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Voice in your head
BODY> Aren't legal barriers due to laws, rather than rights?

I'd say so.

"'Alone in a wilderness, the concept of a right would never occur to you... Rights only apply to beings capable of thought, capable of defining rights...'

  Is this a contradiction? Why or why not?"

Given that a right is the sovereignty to act without the permission of others, I'd say  that the concept would almost certainly never occur to someone who was alone in the wilderness and had never been in the company of others.  Without others, the issue of permission would not arise.  On the other hand, it is possible that a philosophical genius would be able to think through to the concept.  That status does not apply to most people.

A case could be made for disagreement that rights only apply to beings capable of defining rights.  A lot hangs on the meaning of capable.  Those to whom the concept of a right had never occured because they were alone in the wilderness and not capable of defining rights due to that circumstance, would still have rights applicable to them if they came in contact with others.  An infant, even if  not capable of thought or definition, still has a right to life.  On the other hand, if capable refers to the potential or lack of it (past, present, or future) to think the thing through and come to a definition of rights, a different conclusion might be reached.  On what might be the gripping hand, given that a right is the sovereignty to act without the permission of others, I would not depend on going to the wilderness and trying to explain to a lion that the lion does not have that sovereignty.

"'Freedom of speech is the right to say anything you wish...'

  Does this include lies? Why or why not?"

 The Freedom to do something and the right to do that somehing are not the same.  You may have the freedom (through the exercise of free will) to put a pistol ball through my head, but that does not mean you have the right to do so.  In our society, the government may not be able censor your free speech including lies about me, but I can sue you for libel or slander after you have spread the lies because you did not have the right to do so.  In some cases, good reputation is considered a property right  and one has no free speech right to diminish the value of a reputation through lies.
 
 
 

47 posted on 08/31/2003 7:30:47 PM PDT by KrisKrinkle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson