Should Rights have Rights ?

[ACertainPassingUser]

Should Rights have Rights ?

 

[Lloyd]

No

 

[J_Chemist]

No

 

[Leti]

Only if they have Lefts.

 

[TASTYLEADPAINT]

Equal rights Equal lefts

 

[SRB]

Does the center have rights? That's what I thought.

 

[NotaNuffian]

Now that's just BS. What about Front and Back?

 

[Syringe]

Why should they if they don't have anything left?

 

[MintiLime]

Rights should have Rights, otherwise they will be easily torn down.

Human rights, for example, are often violated during war and disaster. If the rights are violated, does not mean that they have an innate Right of their own, to exist and be followed? Otherwise, it would not be a right, just a statement that has been proven untrue in the real world, a hope and dream with no substance.

 

[ThrillingHuman]

if you mean political right then no, to the gulag with them.
else, yes

 

[WingsOfPhantasy]

Yes, I believe that every driver in existence should only drive in the right lane, but no need to get all political and shove it down our throats...

 

[Iamnotabot]

Now that's just BS. What about Front and Back?

That's even more BS. What about Up and Down ?

 

[Placeholder]

Should Rights have Rights ?

Since Rights are neither insentient nor sapient, they're incapable of suffering, so there is no reason to extend them Rights.

Unless it's to help them bootstrap sentience.

 

[ThrillingHuman]

That's even more BS. What about Up and Down ?

who cares? The more important question is about in and out

Since Rights are neither insentient nor sapient, they're incapable of suffering, so there is no reason to extend them Rights.

Unless it's to help them bootstrap sentience.

you have the right to remain silent

 

[Amon_Lock]

Imagine an eagle with two wings on her right side, but no wing on left side? Can you imagine?

Well I cannot right now. My point is my brain is not braining right now. I need to recharge my brain with some smutty novels.

 

[ThrillingHuman]

Imagine an eagle with two wings on her right side, but no wing on left side? Can you imagine?

Well I cannot right now. My point is my brain is not braining right now. I need to recharge my brain with some smutty novels.

here's an ai version

 

[AnonUnlimited]

Can someone define a 'right' please?

 

[Tyranomaster]

If you mean, should the ability to do x be given its own guarantees, then in my opinion yes.

The US constitution and bill of rights are rights being given rights.

It is a way of having the government have to fight itself to remove those rights.

A "right" without rights is just a "gift" the government can remove on a whim.

There is a much deeper philosophical debate here that I don't feel like going into about what "inalienable human rights" are.

 

[Succubiome]

Probably not?

I don't believe in giving rights to conceptual existences, such as rights themselves, unless one also gives them equal responsibilities.

For example, don't you think it'd be kinda silly for a conceptual existence to be able to have free speech, but not be able to be executed, imprisoned, or meaningfully removed from power for intentionally killing a bunch of people to further it's own goals?

Even if it had it's constituent representatives held responsible, sort of sometimes, because tracking exact responsibility would be hard, I feel it would be weird to say, limit the liability of the conceptual existence itself?

 

[georgelee5786]

Inanimate objects do not deserve rights