…then why does it follow that it can change what rights a person has? Why couldn’t it be that rights come from government AND that government can’t just pick any possible set of rights to implement? Do you understand what I mean?
No. But I would like to, if you don’t mind elaborating or explaining.
Have had a bit libation watching the games, not sure what side of the discussion this falls on. …lol. But this is the first thing I thought of. Great series by the way…
From a philosophical viewpoint, rights may come from the creator.
From a practical viewpoint, the securing of those rights, along with recognizing what rights the creator may have endowed us with, is governmental. And governments will evolve in their understanding of what rights are and how to secure them.
Appealing to the non-governmental source of rights is about as effective as appealing to that same source for rain.
The Declaration of Independence says rights are God given. Is that not the framework the Constitution is based upon, lack of use of the word God notwithstanding?
They go hand in hand. You really can’t break them apart.
Conservative arguing against the idea that rights come from government:
My response to them would be to ask “Why could it not be conceivable that rights come from AND that it would be wrong for government to take away rights?”.
Someone arguing for gun control:
My response would be “How does it follow that it would therefore be okay to limit gun rights?”.
Someone arguing for healthcare as a right:
My response would be “But is it morally permissible to do so?”.
Hopefully that clears everything up.
No our rights did not come from the goverment…our goverment is prevented from violating our rights.
As usual, people are going off topic.
I did NOT say that they do come from government. I asked, IF they did come from government, then WHY would it follow that government can pick what will/won’t be made a right all willy nilly?
Government doesn’t change laws or anything on a regular basis, so clearly they wouldn’t change what rights they issue to the people on a similar basis. Maybe it’s a good thing the government doesn’t issue rights.
No their not.
The only right that comes for the God is Free will, everything else we gave ourselves.
to say “rights come for the government” is misplace your rights come for the American people.
God didn’t give us free will, we got it from the tree and got kicked out for it.
Is the government sovereign or the people? Are rights individual or collective?
Is 51% consent of the governed?
At least, that’s true according to our Constitution (which, supposedly, defines our government.)
Human rights come from the creator of humanity. Doesn’t matter if that’s God or Mother Nature.
Entitlements, on the other hand, come from law. Government can create those and take those away.
If they did, sooner or later they would be for sale. Sounds like a plot for a novel.
Dude, did you get your fourth amendment rights yet? Nah, couldn’t afford it……….
“Entitlement” is part of the definition of a “right”.
Here’s the thing. I have a hard time understanding what a “right” is, in the context of a particular discussion.
This is why this debate always comes up - conservatives yelling that “rights” come from God, and liberals yelling that “rights,” as laws, come from governments. It’s just people talking past each other.
Are rights some that is, or something that should be? Are they legal, or moral?
Do rights exist in a state of nature, or are they constructions of society?