Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

What Rights are Americans entitled to?

DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 9:34:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Actually, going from John Locke's natural rights, we really ALL have the right to life, liberty, and property.

As for LEGAL rights, all our civil rights federally are in the Bill of Rights.

What I personally think is that we all have the right to self-determination, expression, speech, etc. Basically, anything that doesn't harm anyone else.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 10:13:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".

Hence you are given the right to "pursuit of happiness", not to actual happiness. You can fail the task, but nobody can take away your right to pursuit it, as long as you respect the rights of others, that you can not do a certain action.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 10:14:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 10:13:10 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".

Hence you are given the right to "pursuit of happiness", not to actual happiness. You can fail the task, but nobody can take away your right to pursuit it, as long as you respect the rights of others, that you can not do a certain action.

This.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 10:18:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 10:13:10 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".

Hence you are given the right to "pursuit of happiness", not to actual happiness. You can fail the task, but nobody can take away your right to pursuit it, as long as you respect the rights of others, that you can not do a certain action.

This doesn't refute what I said. Anything can be considered your PURSUIT to happiness. I could consider throwing a rock at someone my pursuit of happiness, but I don't have a right to do it. I could also consider getting A's in my class a pursuit of happiness, but I still have to actually work to get it. There is no way to violate pursuit of happiness, and there is no way to validate pursuit of happiness because there is an infinite list of situations in which the right is null and void.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 10:20:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 10:18:52 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 10:13:10 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".

Hence you are given the right to "pursuit of happiness", not to actual happiness. You can fail the task, but nobody can take away your right to pursuit it, as long as you respect the rights of others, that you can not do a certain action.

This doesn't refute what I said. Anything can be considered your PURSUIT to happiness. I could consider throwing a rock at someone my pursuit of happiness, but I don't have a right to do it. I could also consider getting A's in my class a pursuit of happiness, but I still have to actually work to get it. There is no way to violate pursuit of happiness, and there is no way to validate pursuit of happiness because there is an infinite list of situations in which the right is null and void.

You're taking pursuit of happiness at too literal of a value--"pursuit of happiness" is just the idea of self-determination, not literal pursuit of happiness.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 10:21:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 10:14:53 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 9/13/2011 10:13:10 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".

Hence you are given the right to "pursuit of happiness", not to actual happiness. You can fail the task, but nobody can take away your right to pursuit it, as long as you respect the rights of others, that you can not do a certain action.

This.

I'll take this as a replication of kermit's response, in which case I refer you to my rebuttal.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
BangBang-Coconut
Posts: 265
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 10:59:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".

I never said people are entitled to happiness, I said they where entitled to the pursuit of happiness. these are two completely different things.
BangBang-Coconut
Posts: 265
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 11:04:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 10:18:52 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 10:13:10 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".

Hence you are given the right to "pursuit of happiness", not to actual happiness. You can fail the task, but nobody can take away your right to pursuit it, as long as you respect the rights of others, that you can not do a certain action.

This doesn't refute what I said. Anything can be considered your PURSUIT to happiness. I could consider throwing a rock at someone my pursuit of happiness, but I don't have a right to do it. I could also consider getting A's in my class a pursuit of happiness, but I still have to actually work to get it. There is no way to violate pursuit of happiness, and there is no way to validate pursuit of happiness because there is an infinite list of situations in which the right is null and void.

Now that's just silly, it's common and plain knowledge that an individual's rights only extend so far as that they do not intrude upon the rights of another. I am using the individual I am throwing the rock at as a means to a end of my own benefit; where as doing such a thing violates their sovereign rights.
As for your getting all A's example, that's not a pursuit; it's a goal. The pursuit of such would be the process taken to get all A's.

And violating the pursuit of happiness is simple, you simply don't let a person work for their dream. If I stopped another individual from say, going to the community pool to work towards their dream of being an Olympic swimmer; I have violated their right. And in the exact same way it can be validated.
BangBang-Coconut
Posts: 265
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 11:05:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 9:34:49 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Actually, going from John Locke's natural rights, we really ALL have the right to life, liberty, and property.

As for LEGAL rights, all our civil rights federally are in the Bill of Rights.

What I personally think is that we all have the right to self-determination, expression, speech, etc. Basically, anything that doesn't harm anyone else.

Very interesting, I don't disagree with you, but wold you care to expand on the right of self-determination?
BangBang-Coconut
Posts: 265
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 11:06:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 10:21:03 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 10:14:53 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 9/13/2011 10:13:10 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".

Hence you are given the right to "pursuit of happiness", not to actual happiness. You can fail the task, but nobody can take away your right to pursuit it, as long as you respect the rights of others, that you can not do a certain action.

This.

I'll take this as a replication of kermit's response, in which case I refer you to my rebuttal.

*Points to Forum tab* quit being so defensive, this is a forum; hence discussion. Not a debate.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 11:09:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 11:04:43 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
At 9/13/2011 10:18:52 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 10:13:10 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".

Hence you are given the right to "pursuit of happiness", not to actual happiness. You can fail the task, but nobody can take away your right to pursuit it, as long as you respect the rights of others, that you can not do a certain action.

This doesn't refute what I said. Anything can be considered your PURSUIT to happiness. I could consider throwing a rock at someone my pursuit of happiness, but I don't have a right to do it. I could also consider getting A's in my class a pursuit of happiness, but I still have to actually work to get it. There is no way to violate pursuit of happiness, and there is no way to validate pursuit of happiness because there is an infinite list of situations in which the right is null and void.

Now that's just silly, it's common and plain knowledge that an individual's rights only extend so far as that they do not intrude upon the rights of another. I am using the individual I am throwing the rock at as a means to a end of my own benefit; where as doing such a thing violates their sovereign rights.
As for your getting all A's example, that's not a pursuit; it's a goal. The pursuit of such would be the process taken to get all A's.

And violating the pursuit of happiness is simple, you simply don't let a person work for their dream. If I stopped another individual from say, going to the community pool to work towards their dream of being an Olympic swimmer; I have violated their right. And in the exact same way it can be validated.

You don't have a right to the community pool. If it is decided that the pool must be closed, it will be closed. I have violated no one's right to anything. Theres no such thing as a right to pursue happiness. If you can come up with 1 scenario where there is a right to pursue happiness, and thus no one must take away the means to which the person can achieve that happiness, then I will concede, but I know you can't, because such does not exist.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
BangBang-Coconut
Posts: 265
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 11:28:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 11:09:02 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 11:04:43 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
At 9/13/2011 10:18:52 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 10:13:10 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:38:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

Those are just pretty words that mean virtually nothing. (The pursuit of happiness part). Happiness is relative, subjective, and undefinable. You cannot have a right to happiness because happiness does not exist on the objective level. You can choose to be happy with whatever you want. If your happiness involves reaching a goal, then it must not interfere with the happiness, rights, or pursuits of others. Basically, pursuit of happiness has an interminable list of clauses to which would annul the supposed "right".

Hence you are given the right to "pursuit of happiness", not to actual happiness. You can fail the task, but nobody can take away your right to pursuit it, as long as you respect the rights of others, that you can not do a certain action.

This doesn't refute what I said. Anything can be considered your PURSUIT to happiness. I could consider throwing a rock at someone my pursuit of happiness, but I don't have a right to do it. I could also consider getting A's in my class a pursuit of happiness, but I still have to actually work to get it. There is no way to violate pursuit of happiness, and there is no way to validate pursuit of happiness because there is an infinite list of situations in which the right is null and void.

Now that's just silly, it's common and plain knowledge that an individual's rights only extend so far as that they do not intrude upon the rights of another. I am using the individual I am throwing the rock at as a means to a end of my own benefit; where as doing such a thing violates their sovereign rights.
As for your getting all A's example, that's not a pursuit; it's a goal. The pursuit of such would be the process taken to get all A's.

And violating the pursuit of happiness is simple, you simply don't let a person work for their dream. If I stopped another individual from say, going to the community pool to work towards their dream of being an Olympic swimmer; I have violated their right. And in the exact same way it can be validated.

You don't have a right to the community pool. If it is decided that the pool must be closed, it will be closed. I have violated no one's right to anything. Theres no such thing as a right to pursue happiness. If you can come up with 1 scenario where there is a right to pursue happiness, and thus no one must take away the means to which the person can achieve that happiness, then I will concede, but I know you can't, because such does not exist.

Well first of all, I never said that the community pool closed, I said that I denied another person entry into said pool.
And yes, if the pool is a community, i.e. state-funded pool, then all american citizens are entitled usage of said pool. just as all American citizens are entitled to all public property.

So to re-iterate the prior example, A person is trying to gain entrance into a public pool to practice so that they can one day enter the Olympics. I, a person completely unrelated with the committee of the public pool, won't let this person enter because I don't like their hair color.
Have I, or have I not violated their right to the pursuit of happiness? Have I not halted their pursuit of pool entry whereas entry would grant them happiness?
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2011 11:41:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"Pursuit of happiness" should be contrasted with fulfilling one's duty to the King or to the church. It was somewhat of a novel concept at the tie to suppose that people lived to act in their own interest rather than to act in the interest of a higher power. It means a lot that you have the right to ursue your own happiness rather than a ruler's happiness.

Human's are social animals. It's no good pretending that society does not exist so that individual rights ought to be absolute. Having no individual rights rejects the personal pursuit of happiness, so that's no good either. A system of rights attempts to set the balance between the individual and society. Rights protect against tyranny, including the tyranny of the majority.

I think freedom of speech is the central right. None of the tyrannies of the world could survive in the face of free speech. The Bill of Rights does a good job of stating rights, but it has proven a failure in terms of guaranteeing property rights. That should be fixed. The government should not be allowed to take whatever it wants without good reason and without just compensation.
wierdman
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2011 12:18:05 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

LD topic?
BangBang-Coconut
Posts: 265
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2011 8:17:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/13/2011 11:41:38 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
"Pursuit of happiness" should be contrasted with fulfilling one's duty to the King or to the church. It was somewhat of a novel concept at the tie to suppose that people lived to act in their own interest rather than to act in the interest of a higher power. It means a lot that you have the right to ursue your own happiness rather than a ruler's happiness.

Human's are social animals. It's no good pretending that society does not exist so that individual rights ought to be absolute. Having no individual rights rejects the personal pursuit of happiness, so that's no good either. A system of rights attempts to set the balance between the individual and society. Rights protect against tyranny, including the tyranny of the majority.

I think freedom of speech is the central right. None of the tyrannies of the world could survive in the face of free speech. The Bill of Rights does a good job of stating rights, but it has proven a failure in terms of guaranteeing property rights. That should be fixed. The government should not be allowed to take whatever it wants without good reason and without just compensation.

Roy, I love reading what you have to say :-D
BangBang-Coconut
Posts: 265
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2011 8:18:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/14/2011 12:18:05 AM, wierdman wrote:
At 9/13/2011 9:31:53 PM, BangBang-Coconut wrote:
I'll start off with a bit of fodder.

Life, Liberty, The pursuit of Happiness

LD topic?

No, at least not that I know of.
I think the current NFL topic has to do with animal rights though.