Free access to scriptures religious leaders try to censor
Do we have too much “humans’ right?” Some people say that humans have certain inalienable rights. And they state it without evidence.
Here is another flip of the coins. Someone ask once asked if you have a right, does that mean others have obligation to pay (or in general provide) for those right?
I’ve been thinking about it for a while. I think the answer is yes. And that’s precisely why we do not, or at least many of us do not, consider the right to eat and healthcare as a “right”.
Because if humans have those right automatically just for being humans means the rest of us will have an obligation to pay for it.
Many, obviously do not want such an obligation. So they decided that no you don’t have that right.
Many, usually the one that will benefit from such “right” and are less likely to be taxed to pay for it, will
In other words, rights, are always there due to some form of consensus.
Humans have right because plenty of us agree that they should have right.
The Arabs don’t have freedom of speech because they don’t have a consensus against humans’ right for freedom of speech.
Most people in
Because right always happen due to consensus of power that be, rights are always alienable.
And I can show this with plenty of evidence. Where is your right to smoke weed
Someone has alienated those right from you in most states, right? Should have
Even a libertarian like me may agree to the criminalization of fentanyl.
Some humans’ rights are beneficial for humans and society. Freedom of speech does not benefit only those who use it. Countries with freedom of speech have less corruption.
There is another problem with humans having too much right. Because a right is often “costly” to provide, humans having too much right can make every
If every human
Another strategy is to simply declare that humans do not have right. They can get they right if they “buy” their right first from society. In ancient time, only men can vote, and they also have an obligation like “drafts”.
Too much right and we have too much welfare. That’ll drive the industrious to other countries. Too little right and we have a tyrant.
Hence, all rights will always be alienable.
Extending “right to live” to unborn babies, for example, is very very costly. Not only you lose votes from those who want to kill babies, you actually have to pay for the babies healthcare, welfare, and education if the fetus manages to be born and get citizenship.
From the economic points of view, we should look the other way around when such “rights” are violated. It’s not about principles. It’s about the bottom line.
Perhaps, in an ideal world, we can implement that. In Nanny welfare states like
However, a party that wants, or at least pretend to want to, criminalize abortion can also have votes from people that just want to bitch about rising socialism by actively forcing those welfare recipients to be born. In the end, it’s always