Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

Rights by Virtue of Humanity

Nerva
Posts: 45
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2016 9:05:34 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
I would like to entertain the rights of individuals by the virtue of their humanity, aside from the Locke-ian interpretation of natural rights, being that of Life, Liberty, and Property.

I believe that rights are inherited by virtue of humanity, but are recognized by the state, and can be fought for if they are not. All rights that I would believe a human should have are stated in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution.

However, I do not believe that certain services are a right to be provided free of charge, such as healthcare and education.

I would like to hear the thoughts of other individuals who may have a different interpretation.
Don't get on my nerva.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2016 9:14:54 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/13/2016 9:05:34 PM, Nerva wrote:
I would like to entertain the rights of individuals by the virtue of their humanity, aside from the Locke-ian interpretation of natural rights, being that of Life, Liberty, and Property.

I believe that rights are inherited by virtue of humanity, but are recognized by the state, and can be fought for if they are not. All rights that I would believe a human should have are stated in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution.

However, I do not believe that certain services are a right to be provided free of charge, such as healthcare and education.

I would like to hear the thoughts of other individuals who may have a different interpretation.

Pretty much I agree.

I would only differ in that individuals have a right to education, doesn't imply non-restriction to education. but I think non-restriction is favorable.

Government should make attempts that safeguard the continuing existence of it's citizens. The welfare of the union then can be tied to such topics as education, military spending, and healthcare.

I'm opposed to government mandate forcing people to buy from a private monopoly, to get care at tax payer funded clinics. I think that is double taxing the population that results in only private owners getting the benefit.

And while I will argue that public education is in the best interest of the people and a responsibility of the government, I have many more contentions on how such a goal is achieved.

State and local government preferable over the convoluted national oversight and wasteful federal spending.
Nerva
Posts: 45
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2016 9:16:44 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/13/2016 9:14:54 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 2/13/2016 9:05:34 PM, Nerva wrote:
I would like to entertain the rights of individuals by the virtue of their humanity, aside from the Locke-ian interpretation of natural rights, being that of Life, Liberty, and Property.

I believe that rights are inherited by virtue of humanity, but are recognized by the state, and can be fought for if they are not. All rights that I would believe a human should have are stated in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution.

However, I do not believe that certain services are a right to be provided free of charge, such as healthcare and education.

I would like to hear the thoughts of other individuals who may have a different interpretation.

Pretty much I agree.

I would only differ in that individuals have a right to education, doesn't imply non-restriction to education. but I think non-restriction is favorable.

Government should make attempts that safeguard the continuing existence of it's citizens. The welfare of the union then can be tied to such topics as education, military spending, and healthcare.

I'm opposed to government mandate forcing people to buy from a private monopoly, to get care at tax payer funded clinics. I think that is double taxing the population that results in only private owners getting the benefit.

And while I will argue that public education is in the best interest of the people and a responsibility of the government, I have many more contentions on how such a goal is achieved.

State and local government preferable over the convoluted national oversight and wasteful federal spending.

I meant higher education. I would think that having some level of local and state funded basic education is good, so that everyone can learn the most basic of skills, but I do not believe that college is a right to be funded by the government.
Don't get on my nerva.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2016 9:20:02 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/13/2016 9:16:44 PM, Nerva wrote:
At 2/13/2016 9:14:54 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 2/13/2016 9:05:34 PM, Nerva wrote:
I would like to entertain the rights of individuals by the virtue of their humanity, aside from the Locke-ian interpretation of natural rights, being that of Life, Liberty, and Property.

I believe that rights are inherited by virtue of humanity, but are recognized by the state, and can be fought for if they are not. All rights that I would believe a human should have are stated in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution.

However, I do not believe that certain services are a right to be provided free of charge, such as healthcare and education.

I would like to hear the thoughts of other individuals who may have a different interpretation.

Pretty much I agree.

I would only differ in that individuals have a right to education, doesn't imply non-restriction to education. but I think non-restriction is favorable.

Government should make attempts that safeguard the continuing existence of it's citizens. The welfare of the union then can be tied to such topics as education, military spending, and healthcare.

I'm opposed to government mandate forcing people to buy from a private monopoly, to get care at tax payer funded clinics. I think that is double taxing the population that results in only private owners getting the benefit.

And while I will argue that public education is in the best interest of the people and a responsibility of the government, I have many more contentions on how such a goal is achieved.

State and local government preferable over the convoluted national oversight and wasteful federal spending.

I meant higher education. I would think that having some level of local and state funded basic education is good, so that everyone can learn the most basic of skills, but I do not believe that college is a right to be funded by the government.

Oh well Higher education is a private industry show we have the same contention I have with Obamacare.

Legislation forcing tax payer to additionally buy from a company in order to use services and products funded by taxpayer money.

With that clarification I would say we are in agreement.

While I think the idea of welfare of the Union can be extended to include education of technical and specific disciplines. I'm not inclined to argue so.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2016 9:56:58 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
Rights are things that we as human beings recognize are favorable to the whole, and thus decide to grant to everyone and fight to protect.

Our desire to live and recognition of the fact that the best way to achieve this desire entails all of us working together to protect one another from an undeserved death is what leads to a right - such as the right to life - to be granted.

People talk about rights like we all have them regardless of what people think. That is absurd. A right that is not granted is just an imaginary idea.
Nerva
Posts: 45
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2016 10:02:27 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/13/2016 9:56:58 PM, Double_R wrote:
Rights are things that we as human beings recognize are favorable to the whole, and thus decide to grant to everyone and fight to protect.

Our desire to live and recognition of the fact that the best way to achieve this desire entails all of us working together to protect one another from an undeserved death is what leads to a right - such as the right to life - to be granted.

People talk about rights like we all have them regardless of what people think. That is absurd. A right that is not granted is just an imaginary idea.

That is why people must fight for the recognition of their rights. I would argue that a "premise" set of rights exist, and that individuals who seek to be free should fight for more rights that enable them to be free, not those that obligate others to act uniformly. I also think that people can associate voluntarily, and yes, there is quite a lot of good that comes from mutual cooperation.
Don't get on my nerva.
TheStatelyGoose
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2016 10:08:55 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/13/2016 9:05:34 PM, Nerva wrote:
I would like to entertain the rights of individuals by the virtue of their humanity, aside from the Locke-ian interpretation of natural rights, being that of Life, Liberty, and Property.

I simply observe that to gauge the virtue of humanity is to question it's existence, ans that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (property) have certain alienable, and inalienable limitations which are all governed by laws natural and unnatural- much the same in both respects.

I believe that rights are inherited by virtue of humanity, but are recognized by the state, and can be fought for if they are not. All rights that I would believe a human should have are stated in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution.

I believe in the virtue of humanity in that humanity recognizes its own shortcomings and therefor comes into common agreement over universal values and laws whether they are attainable within the rights of man in the first place. Nevertheless are his highest ideals set suspended above in the vent of a perfect world.

However, I do not believe that certain services are a right to be provided free of charge, such as healthcare and education.

In this world, nothing is ever free, even the things that are.

I would like to hear the thoughts of other individuals who may have a different interpretation.

~ ?