[JohnFen]

You're conflating two different things -- the law, and the concepts of right and wrong.

But the majority of the things people think of as "rights" do, in fact, come from the law. "The law" is just us collectively deciding what the rules we live by are.

There is a small set of fundamental human rights, but that's a bit of a different thing and I think it's very hard to argue that driving a vehicle on public roads is one of them.

[dancingvoid]

I reject that anyone else can tell me what rules to live by. I only respect other peoples requests if they claim and show that my actions are causing harm. Otherwise, the “collective” is just a bunch of people I never met ganging up and telling me how to live my life at the point of a gun. And they don’t even have the courage to hold the gun themselves in most cases but go crying to father government to punish people they don’t agree with.

I define “rights” as what I may do morally, not a code, act, statue or “collective” decision. Words can have multiple meanings. What you are calling rights, I am calling arbitrary rules made by other people against my will.

Edit to reply to below: I am that I am. I don’t take titles like anarchist, but sure, that’s a decent title if you insist.

Anarchy isn’t a system. It’s just a word. It means no rulers. I don’t think that we should abolish the government (nor could we, it doesn’t exist), I just wish people would grow up morally, so we (conscious beings) didn’t feel the need to play ruler and ruled. I wish to see a world where each being understands morality and what is right and wrong “to the bones” or “from the soul”, so the idea of abstracting away and externalizing our morality and violence was no longer the accepted normal.

[JohnFen]

So you're an anarchist. That's fine. But, at least right now, that's not the system we have.