Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Marcuse0 t1_j6ir6lb wrote

I know that it's not meant to be taken fully literally, but it does annoy me that everything now is treated as a "right", when rights are limited freedoms which are supposed to be guaranteed by governments. These are more in the class of things people do, which you can't stop them doing.

I'm also not sure what they're supposed to tell a reader in the first place. Are people really crying out for the "right to be silent"?

12

icarusrising9 t1_j6jcc69 wrote

"...rights are limited freedoms which are supposed to be guaranteed by governments"? I mean, I think Englightenment-era thinkers certainly didn't talk about rights in this way, nor does the US Constitution. Nevermind more recent stuff, like Roosevelt's "second bill of rights".

6

Amzuja t1_j6jlf1x wrote

They’re correct though. I can’t think of any rights that a government guarantees and/or can’t overrule. We don’t, as a species, have any inherent universal rights. They’re man made ideas, which evolve with time and are changeable as morals change

1

icarusrising9 t1_j6jqsaz wrote

You're contradicting what they said, and talking about stuff outside the context of Rights Theory. I just meant to point out that rights as "limited freedoms [...] guaranteed by governments" is sort of silly, since the whole point of rights are to push back on perceived violation of those rights.

2

Merle8888 t1_j6kgsrm wrote

Yeah the whole thing does seem a bit silly to me. Even if we take it as colloquial rights, as in, “stop giving people a hard time for doing this,” I feel like the right to DNF is the only one on the list that anyone would even give a hard time over. I’d probably fill in the rest with stuff about people’s right to have their own opinions and interpretations which may differ from the author’s, etc.

1