• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

What is a "Right"???

"Why yes your honor, I did take that TV from Best Buy without paying. But corporations are like collectives and therefore didn't have ownership of the TV. The defense rests".
 
"Why yes your honor, I did take that TV from Best Buy without paying. But corporations are like collectives and therefore didn't have ownership of the TV. The defense rests".


"And furthermore, that F18 I took to was collectively owned by the American taxpayers so they really didn't have ownership of it."
 
"In conclusion, I believe in my heart that I should be allowed to remain free because I believe in the ideasphere I have the right to Liberty."
 
Except of course where the US has a direct interest in taking them away, then the "might is right" principle applies.

What does the right to life mean? What are the limits? How is it secured?

What does the right to liberty mean? What are the limits? How is it secured?

What does the right to property mean? What are the limits? How is it secured?

Still waiting for an answer to any one of these questions. If you can only answer one at a time this may clearly indicate some of the limits of your own education and/or experience.
 
Still waiting for an answer to any one of these questions. If you can only answer one at a time this may clearly indicate some of the limits of your own education and/or experience.

Rights do not have to be "secured" in order to be rights. And, one question at a time,please.
 
Rights do not have to be "secured" in order to be rights. And, one question at a time,please.


Rights do need to be secured in order to be rights.

We may call this security the guaranteeing of those rights, but without a guarantee or protection (generally provided by societal tradition and compliance or by legal means), they remain nothing more than an abstract philosophical construct.

Saying you have the right to liberty means nothing if the state can arrest and detain you without trial (habeus corpus) because its a war and someone says you are a traitor to use your own example. But if the courts are able to override the executive's decision as it runs contrary to rights and the law, then the that concept has some weight.
 
Collective ownership refers to public ownership. Obviously.
Robert, you seem to be asserting that since the Americas were largely "collectively" owned by different nations (Sioux nation, Cherokee nation, Aztec nation, etc..)prior to European conquest, that they in fact had no legitimate claim to these lands, and no "rights" were violated by the Europeans.

Is this correct?

On another note, I do appreciate you taking the time to debate your views on the issue and hope that vitriol from other posters won't chase you off this thread.
 
Robert, you seem to be asserting that since the Americas were largely "collectively" owned by different nations (Sioux nation, Cherokee nation, Aztec nation, etc..)prior to European conquest, that they in fact had no legitimate claim to these lands, and no "rights" were violated by the Europeans.
Ah, so then you would agree that the Americas are "collectively" owned by different people (me, my neighbors, etc..) in fact we have no legitimate claim to these lands, and no "rights" would be violated by anyone who conquers us?
 
Ah, so then you would agree that the Americas are "collectively" owned by different people (me, my neighbors, etc..) in fact we have no legitimate claim to these lands, and no "rights" would be violated by anyone who conquers us?
That was not my assertion, I was looking for clarification of RobertPreys' posts that seem to follow that line of reasoning so far.
 

Back
Top Bottom