The Instigator
dr.jimmythefish
Pro (for)
The Contender
GoOrDin
Con (against)

Human rights are for psychos as well

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
GoOrDin has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Judge Point System: Select Winner
Started: 1/2/2017 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 532 times Debate No: 98567
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)

 

dr.jimmythefish

Pro

If you denied all who revoked the basic rights of man the basic rights of man then, 1 you're being a hypocrite as you're doing just that, and 2 you leaving what these rights are to whom exactly? Yourself? Then hello Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin to the twenty first century and the internet. Stop and think if you deny the most basic of rights what makes you better then them, you devalue the idea of inalienable to mean for my people when convenvent.
GoOrDin

Con

Human rights are Ideas credited to human's by humans, and are nothing more.
Specifically Human rights are given by a governing authority.

psychos human rights are limited tot he same rights as every one else.

oh. okay. so technically yes. Human rights are for psych's as well.

BUT, assuming that you are asserting, Psychos have freedom to express themselves however they choose:
is factually wrong,

As someone who is not a psycho can have freedom of religion and speech,
A psycho can easily be breeching those laws by "doing the same thing"
because a sane person CHOOSES to express themselves acceptably and within the confines of Law,
while psychos are criminally negligent as a preference of expression.
Debate Round No. 1
dr.jimmythefish

Pro

1 clarification; by psychos I mean Hitler/Stalin like genocidal maniacs, and there followers, to reference the dark knight saga the sons of batman. 2 If you say that all people violate human rights lose there inalienable rights , witch is by definition contradictory, then you are a hypocrite, then under the assumption that you are democratically elected then the people by backing you and by not impeaching they are aiding and abetting the crime, thus you are guilty thus you are punished thus you are proposing martial law.
GoOrDin

Con

Oh man. Thank you.
well, yes I agree.
But it is not a human right to Live, it is a Right to live without being subjugated to harsh conditions correct?

But No. Psychos are subject to complete discrimination. They are given fair trial. But vial fare trial, Human rights are scrapeable to make way for new order.

Make an example of an indivual can prevent much worse things. The things being prevented are the Rights of the Un-accused.
Debate Round No. 2
dr.jimmythefish

Pro

The words discrimination and fair describing the same thing, is contradictory. And the right to not be dead and the right to decent living conditions (witch capitalism floats so it really doesn't matter). The main point is you're devaluing the rights of man for all time for a temporary shock to the population. It's simply not worth it. We need to punish these people yes remove them from power yes but wasting life and ruining our future is not equitable to the gain.
GoOrDin

Con

The Law is in place to say, "Idiots do not get an opinion."

Human Rights, are an illusion provided by the institute that made that decision, provides your security, education, media, economy and Food, and that "Right"

is that Psychos get a fair trial, regarding all Human Rights, except their Freedom of Choice (preference).
Debate Round No. 3
dr.jimmythefish

Pro

Yes the system made these rights but then logically people adore the things they create no matter how stupid they are (example children). You claim that they are "inalienable" and then if I put you under the gun you will quote them at me but give a person power they will use it vindictivly. Your rules only make sense if you follow them, the idea contractinisum is you do this for gain, you lose the gain by breaking rules but if you label a rule as being linked to personhood you must respect it even when they break faith, your argument could be applied to say that if you disagree with society (over any issue this could be slavery, pedophilia, and other such abominations) if they are tried you can kill um, hello bob ewel.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
Natural Rights: Life, liberty and property.

According to Natural Rights, all humans are entitled to life.
Posted by David_Debates 1 year ago
David_Debates
Only a thousand characters?
How on earth are you going to have an intelligent debate if you can't even argue more than one paragraph?
Posted by Mike_10-4 1 year ago
Mike_10-4
Human rights are not only "for psychos" they are for everyone. In fact all life has "unalienable Rights." The science of "Rights":
http://www.westernfreepress.com...
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
You have the right to pie in your toilet..
Posted by dr.jimmythefish 1 year ago
dr.jimmythefish
I think this bloke won't respond. If I reran it as an open would you judge?
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.