Another formulation: we can only tell people under some circumstances "you must not take action X" not "you must take action X." Compelling action is a violation of basic personhood.
Yeah, that is the nomenclature: "negative rights" are legitimate "positive rights" are a perversion of the original idea.
The same is not true of something like free speech which is a natural right. My right to call the doctor an asshole doesn't interfere with his right to practice medicine freely. Consistency.
You cannot compel a doctor to practice his profession when he does not want to without violating the most obvious and basic of rights.
Another way of thinking about the issue is to consider conflicts between rights. Fake rights like "health care" always conflict with other rights, reading to an inconsistent framework.
If somebody claims that something like health care, schooling, etc. is a "human right" just ask yourself: "do I have that right on a desert island?" If the answer is no, it's not an actual right
Put another way: the only person who can take away your rights is another human being. You cannot have your rights violated if you are stranded on a desert island.
The whole point of rights as a concept is to derive a system based on basic ground rules whereby moral agents can peacefully coexist on a higher plane than nature. It is a separate layer.
The whole concept of rights doesn't make any sense otherwise: is a bear violating my rights when he eats me? Of course not. Trying to claim otherwise is just silly.
Yeah, that view is only consistent if you don't understand rights or deliberately twist the meaning. Rights can only be taken away by moral agents, that is men, not by nature or reality itself.
@ex, correct as usual. There are very few actual human rights, but those few must be defended at all costs: life, liberty and property (not an exhaustive list, but close).
Currently, even though LR and her ilk mostly hurt themselves through their victimhood complex, they are still dangerous carriers of disease. BCH is the antiviral that will keep them quarantined.
Once we take away the golden gun that redistributionists want to use to violate basic human rights, it will no longer matter what people like LR think or say. The virus will be safely contained.
Nobody should be given any control (however minute) over the gun of government simply for existing. In fact, nobody should be given control over the gun of government, period.
That is why BCH is so important. Giving undeserved political power to useful idiots who propagate the mind virus that infects people like LightRider cannot be allowed to undo our civilization.
The useless whining of the Trump Derangement Syndrome head cases never gets old. Just a matter of time before they do something really stupid and undermine their interests even further.
For many, it is simply easier to construct a fairytale than face personal failure, self destructive though it may be. "Money is evil!" is the cry of those who no nothing of money or history.
If socialists understood money, they wouldn't be poor bitter people married to an ideology that takes resentment as it's highest virtue.
Can't wait for somebody to unfreeze Disney... first words out of his mouth would probably, be "where is my brother Roy and why did he put a Jew in charge???"
Yeah, true. At that point the game becomes how to best keep what you have... and maybe crazy shit like immortality.
@ex, yeah it was pretty unusual, I usually don't have mini-epiphanies like that unless I've had a joint or two first, but I was stone cold sober, I swear.
The only people who are totally satisfied are probably the billionaires. Us lower tier capitalists have plenty to complain about.
@ex, yep. I am also late to the party. @LR, please visit /r/anarcho_capitalism and then try and say with a straight face all capitalists are satisfied with the status quo.
Yeah, I just made the connection last night while looking for the soap, lol
