a human right. This is an opinion and point of view for both of us,
and can not be logicaly debated.
--- In [email protected], "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Rights ARE inalienable. They are not HANDED OUT at birth, they
are a
> BIRTH RIGHT. We attain them at birth because this is when we have
> been created (notice the past tense of that word) aka BORN. You
get
> birthrights at birth, hence the term BIRTH right.
>
> At birth we are born as property owners, and the first thing we
own is
> ourselves. This is why we have rights at birth. Until the moment
of
> birth we do not have any rights, not even the right to live.
NOTHING
> inside the body of a person has any rights....not even if it were
> another person (which a fetus is not).
>
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <uncoolrabbit@>
> 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.
