this oft repeated point, but NOBODY in this discussion has challenged
the inalienability of human rights; rather, the exploration is about
criteria for identification and RECOGNITION by political law (applies
to human and NON-human alike)
Are you incapable of abstract reasoning or just refusing its use in
this issue?
-Terry Liberty Parker
'PERSONHOOD: Abortion & beyond'
at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/message/48172
--- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Then, Mark, you assume that rights are not inalienable, and thus
> handed out like a birth certificate. I reiterate my rejection of
> this thought. I can not reconcile the concept of the state owning
my
> very being, and all my rights are dirived from the state rather
than
> my being itself. Rights should not become a synonymn for
privledges,
> nothing could be more dangerous to libertey.
>
> I am discussing what I am discussing and what I am discussing is
how
> defending abortion can not be seen as the only Libertarian point of
> view. I am talking about human rights Mark. My discussion is not
> being directed by your desire or any one elses to only look at a
> piece of the picture and ignore the darker sides that some find
> unpleasant.
>
> My point of view of abortion extends directly from my point of view
> on what the difference between a right and a privledge are. #6 is
> supposed to be used as a legal term for contracts and legislation,
> not as a tool of opression but it is so easily misused by those who
> misconstrue its purpose, and is thus a monstrocity.
>
>
> Here is the biggest mindbogler for me. Personhood in your point of
> view being about who gets rights and who does not. This is
assigned,
> it is not in stone and thus who is curently a person and who is not
> is irelevant to the greater question of who should be a person
under
> your definition. Definition #1 answers that question. #6 is simply
a
> matter of legal terminolgy. Who recieves human rights is not,
rights
> are not granted by legislation or contract Mark. How can that be so
> objectionable of a thought to a 'libertarian group.'
>
> --- In [email protected], "mark robert" <colowe@> wrote:
> >
> > Uncool,
> >
> > I don't comprehend why you are explaining the nature of rights,
> > when we are discussing abortion and "human" vs "person".
> >
> > Regarding "person", Merriam Webster grants synonymy with "human"
> > in def # 1. But def # 6 says: "one (as a human being, a
> > partnership, or a corporation) that is recognized by law as the
> > subject of rights and duties."
> >
> > Since this discussion is about abortion (and immigration?) and
> > what life-stage qualifies for full rights, I assume #6 is more
> > appropriate here.
> >
> > -Mark
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ************
> > {American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
> > "not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
> > case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions.
> > There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a
> > unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill
> > its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
> > unjust lawsuits.
> > See www.fija.org
> > [Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
> >
> > ----------
> >
> >
> > I disagree. Rights are NOT given to us by the state or by
> > political
> > aperatus Mark. Rights, are those things that are believed to be
> > ours
> > with out strings attached. Human seems far more apropriate to me
> > for
> > discussing rights Mark. Thats why they say "Human rights" Mark.
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "mark robert" <colowe@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > For our purposes, "human" seems more scientific and "person"
> > more
> > > political. I believe the latter is more accommodating for
> > > discussing rights.
> > >
> >
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
