Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ceejayoz 76 days ago
"An American helped convince 193 countries of something, therefore it's invalid" is a take, I suppose.
1 comments
0x3f 76 days ago
Well this was really just a sub-argument about whether 'inalienable' is an Americanism, which it is. The real point about 'natural' rights, or whatever term you've switched to using, is that they're simply assertions. Not supported by anything else. Doesn't really matter who is asserting them. The argument takes the same form, and is equally bunk.
link
ceejayoz 76 days ago
> whatever term you've switched to using

They're synonyms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_right goes to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rights_and_legal_right.... This happens a lot in English.

"Natural rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government, and so are universal, fundamental and inalienable..."

> is that they're simply assertions

So's "we don't have natural rights".

link
0x3f 76 days ago
> So's "we don't have natural rights".

That's the null hypothesis. There are no teapots orbiting the sun, either.

link
ceejayoz 76 days ago
How fascinating it is that your opinion is the only one not requiring support.

I think I will take feedback from someone who’s heard of a thesaurus.

link