|
|
|
|
|
by somerandomqaguy
683 days ago
|
|
>To use your example, the slave owner's right to pursuit of happiness ends where the slaves' rights to liberty and pursuit of happiness begin. A would-be slave owner cannot and should not violate another man's (a would-be slave's) right to liberty and pursuit of happiness Except you've chosen to violate the owners right to happiness by attempting to place limitations on the rights that were so called inalienable. What you think the limit should be and what the slave owner thinks the limit should be differ. Same right, but in this case brought into conflict by disagreement of interpretations. Second, what happens when the other side refuses to stop because he believes that your interpretation is wrong? What do you do then? |
|
Governments are also tasked with guaranteeing those rights, and those who violate another's rights are deprived of their rights as mandated by laws.
For example, a murderer (violator of another's right to life) is imprisoned (deprived of his right to liberty) and possibly even executed (deprived of his right to life).