|
|
|
|
|
by abcde666777
60 days ago
|
|
I consider rights a functional abstraction. That is to say, they're useful, we should abide them as a tenet of a civilized society, but we also made them up. And importantly we all recognize that they're conditional - if you cross certain lines of conduct you lose them - and there's actually a lot of debate to be had about where those lines are. So I disagree with your axiom that you have to believe in them 100% or 0%. |
|
One hundred percent of those debates end at process, not unilateral action. If it can be unilaterally nullified, it is no longer a right.
> you have to believe in them 100% or 0%
Not degree but range. We don’t have a right to infinite life or medicine. But everyone has to have the same level of right for it to be a right. Otherwise I can disagree with your right to a right and nullify it on my own terms.