Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Definition of Right

Posted on 04/09/2009 9:36:35 AM PDT by ideablitz

Koh recently said "modern right-protecting democracy"

according to "Right" can be defined as -In accordance with fact, reason, or truth. -Fitting, proper, or appropriate. -Most favorable, desirable, or convenient.

With this definition, it seems that the right can be anything as long as it is most favorable, desirable, or convenient.

Maybe, this isn't what the founding father meant. I think the explicit definition is required.. almost bordering the legalism.

can someone define what the "right" is and de-construct the "modern right-protecting democracy"?

Thank you

TOPICS: General Discussion
KEYWORDS: definition; right; rights; term

1 posted on 04/09/2009 9:36:36 AM PDT by ideablitz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ideablitz

Ultimately in a democracy, the voter decides the definition of ‘right’.

2 posted on 04/09/2009 9:42:44 AM PDT by ex-snook ( "Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook

“in a democracy, the voter decides the definition of ‘right’”


3 posted on 04/09/2009 9:57:52 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out (click my name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ideablitz
In this context, I don't think they are 'protecting' that which is "fact, reason, or truth. -Fitting, proper, or appropriate . .". I belive the 'right-protecting democracies' are addressing the rights that are best characterized as: Privileges made irrevocable.

This use of "right" is consistent with the usage in the "Bill of Rights" etc. Supposedly, the 'right-protecting democracies' guarantee such rights as freedom of speech - most especially speech that those in power may not think is "fact, reason, or truth."

The problem arises when privileges that are inherently in conflict are both determined to be 'rights.' What then do the 'democracies' 'protect?'

Do we have a 'right' to use our own property as we see fit (so long as it harms no one else) or to "free" health care?

Do we have a right to the fruits of our own labor, or does someone else have the right to force us to work for their personal benefit under threat of violence if we don't?

Most people who use 'right' nowadays are speaking of a entirely different set of 'rights' than our nation has traditionally recognized, and they aren't interested at all in protecting our traditional rights.
4 posted on 04/09/2009 10:01:28 AM PDT by Phlyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ideablitz

To Ideablitz:
Best definition of rights: Google “Bye-Bye Sweet Liberty,”
click ‘Book’ and open Chapter13, Doing good. Here is a sample of what you will find:
“What is a right?

A right is a freedom to act, without restraint. Such as I have a right to breathe.
In general, actions are unrestricted as long as we don’t cause harm to others. (As stated by B. Juarez.) I have a right to walk on the sidewalk, but I don’t have the right to enter my neighbor’s house without his permission.

Rights can be voluntarily surrendered, such as taking a job and agreeing to be on the job from 9 to 5.

Rights can be restricted by means of law, such as there are many places where I cannot drive my automobile at a speed exceeding 35 mph. Laws always restrict rights. All too frequently, doing good results in the passage of laws that have no effect other than to reduce our rights. The founding fathers knew this and made it plain in their writings that they favored a society with few laws. “The government that governs best, governs least,” encapsulates their thinking fairly well.

The Bill of Rights does not grant rights, it merely clarifies that some rights are particularly mentioned as a foil to demagoguery and obfuscation. The Founders knew that demagogues and liars would do everything possible to limit rights by saying such rights never existed. Some of the Founders knew there was a risk of adding the Bill of Rights to the Constitution, as it might be argued that rights of citizens were limited to the listed ones. For that reason, Amendments 9 and 10 were included.”

You will also find much much more, including some distorted, misguided “rights” defined by the United Nations.

5 posted on 06/05/2009 3:36:10 PM PDT by El Gringo (Adelante, con ganas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

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