Where do we get our rights from?

Post Reply New Topic

Right on, good correction. With my dyslexia I'm surprised I can find my ass with two hands most of the time.

And so to, that is why unalienable rights were worded as such to separate any reference to Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, in which he worded it as inalienable rights.

Which way is which, but a lifeless circle, and the stupid snake who is dangerous for humans to tread on has bitten it's own tail with full venom?

Oh NO!! ! The SAME VOICE AS THE Boston Tea Baggers heard from the Sky??

Ron Paul supporters will be terrified if this goes through:
http://www.jacklacton.com/2007/06/ron-p ... ified.html

Oh sure, it's not because of the impairment, it's because of the effects of the impairment, like the downpour of prejudice from all the know-it-all Archie Bunkers about Asperger's Syndrome.

Well, rewrite history too, much more than a tweak:
http://www.freedomadvocates.org/article ... 090805368/

It ain't all the snakes' fault, "it's the Gods' fault" will be the next story heard when the snakes slither for cover.

Tadzio

Your distinction is both insufficient and simplistic.

A right is an entitlement, recognized at law, and enforcable in courts of law. (As distinct from courts of equity--an obsolete distinction in most, but not all, common law jurisdictions).

Rights may be conferred in a wide variety of ways. When I lease a piece of property to a tenant, I grant that tenant a legal right to occupy that property. A tenant's right to possession has been recognized as a "right" in Common Law for at least 8 centuries. When a tenant takes possession of property, that tenant acquires a right to quiet enjoyment (that's the basis of an occupier's capacity to sue for nuisance). When two parents seek to dissolve their marriage, the child has a right of access to both parents.

So we see rights conferred by contract (occupancy), by common law (quiet enjoyment) and by statute (access). Constitutional right are another type of statutory right.

Inalienability is not an aspect of right. An tenant loses the right to occupy land upon failure to honour the obligations in the lease. A tenant's right to quite enjoyment is alienated by the state's authority to undertake public works. A child's right to access is alienated by reaching the age of majority. Even the so-called inalienable rights are subject to infringement by operation of law.

A privilege is an immunity from the law that accrues to a class of persons on the basis of certain conditions. Solicitors are immune from subpoena and compulsion to testify regarding communications between them and their individual clients in anticipation of litigation (solicitor-client privilege). Spouses are immune from subpoena and compulsion in criminal matters (spousal privilege). The operation of equity will, in some cases, estop the exercise of legal rights, granting privilege to the beneficiary of the estoppel.

A license (the word you should be using) is a conferral of permission that makes an activity that would otherwise be unlawful, lawful (i.e. licit). In the absence of a license to practice medicine, it is unlawful so to do. In the absence of a driving license, it is unlawful to operate a motor vehicle. In the absence of a license it is unlawful to make copies of a copywrited work or make use of a patented device or process.

^ That seems to make more sense, but in a complicated way.

This also relates to a nearby thread on morality, in that both "Morality" and "Rights" are defined by consensus, granted and enforced by authority, and are not in any way a by-product of any universally natural force or principle.

What has been deemed "Inalienable"/"Unalienable", may be taken away at any time without warning or valid reason.