Can your "rights" impose on others? [Poll]

[Anon2024]

Negative Rights - Things that are inherent. Such as the right to breathe. Do not impose on other people to do something.
Positive Rights - Rights that require other people to provide a service for you.

While I won't go into specifics, if your 'rights' requires someone else to do something, is it really a right?
If you have a right to free jello for instance, does someone else have to pay for it or make it for you? What about their rights as a person to not be providing free jello?

This was actually something I was going to put in my novel, so why not make a poll since people are trendily posting about it.

 

[Simo]

Your rights cease to be rights once they impose on another person’s freedom.

 

[Tyranomaster]

Techically, you can never force someone to work for you, so labeling anything that requires someone else's labor as a "right" is just marxist word play to try to convince midwits that they're being mistreated by the bourgeois.

I say technically, because the person being forced has willpower and can just not work (and/or be killed/suicide themselves). They could also fight back.

Edit: The most the government can do is attempt to convince laborers that they should work harder and for less money by threat of violence. Then, when an emergency comes up, the whole system collapses because those who are coerced to work by threat have no reason to work when the job itself poses a threat.

 

[Placeholder]

Your rights cease to be rights once they impose on another person’s freedom

Every right is a constraint on the actions of others - if you have a right to clean air and water, I can't build a lead smelter next door and just pollute the fuck out of everything. (See also carbon emissions.)

If you have a right to property, I can't take your stuff.

If you have a right to privacy, that's more constraints on my behavior.

 

[Deleted member 113259]

Rights that impose on others are called wrongs.

 

[Placeholder]

Techically, you can never force someone to work for you,

In the US, slave owners thought they had the right to the labor of others. And did force that.

Not the only time or place chattel slavery has popped up.

Horrifically evil.

More recently, the US has a lot of people in prison for say, pot possession, who are forced to work.

 

[phaeous]

They are Freedom->Action not Entitlement->Enslave

The idea that your right-o-way means that I must get outta your way, ignores the reality that interests of innocent individuals do not coerce each other; they are harmonious since my productive surplus is a boon to you —TRADE is the method that creators fundamentally and automatically use when interacting.

 

[J_Chemist]

what is happening with these threads and why are they evolving like an Eevee being given a bunch of different stones.

 

[Tyranomaster]

In the US, slave owners thought they had the right to the labor of others. And did force that.

Not the only time or place chattle slavery has popped up.

Horrifically evil.

More recently, the US has a lot of people in prison for say, pot possession, who are forced to work.

Slave revolts were a thing.

Epstein killed himself in prison.

You can never guarantee that forced labor will continue.

Thus, it isn't a right, just a constraint someone is attempting to force on you.

(Inb4 "the government could kill you so you don't have free speech")

 

[Lloyd]

The only "right" I believe in is the right to be free from sin. To that end we can absolutely impose on others. People are commiting suicide of the soul, and it's up to the government to take the gun out of their mouths. If they can't do at least that, then what the fuck are we even paying taxes for?

 

[Succubiome]

Every right is a constraint on the actions of others - if you have a right to clean air and water, I can't build a lead smelter next door and just pollute the fuck out of everything. (See also carbon emissions.)

If you have a right to property, I can't take your stuff.

If you have a right to privacy, that's more constraints on my behavior.

I agree with Placeholder here, and these are all also reversely true:

If you have the right to pollute, it's a restriction on my ability to breathe and not be poisoned.

If you have absolute property rights over the surrounding land, you can arbitrarily restrict my rights within them, because it's your property and you can tell me I'm free to walk inside and not allowed to leave the outer ring, you're the only one who can legally grow food, etc.

If you have the right to talk about me however you like, you can tell people how and where to best kill me, or make up lies about taboo behavior I'm doing.

 

[phaeous]

Individual Rights
¶
A “right” is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man’s freedom of action in a social context. There is only one fundamental right (all the others are its consequences or corollaries): a man’s right to his own life. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action; the right to life means the right to engage in self-sustaining and self-generated action—which means: the freedom to take all the actions required by the nature of a rational being for the support, the furtherance, the fulfillment and the enjoyment of his own life. (Such is the meaning of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.)

The concept of a “right” pertains only to action—specifically, to freedom of action. It means freedom from physical compulsion, coercion or interference by other men.

Thus, for every individual, a right is the moral sanction of a positive—of his freedom to act on his own judgment, for his own goals, by his own voluntary, uncoerced choice. As to his neighbors, his rights impose no obligations on them except of a negative kind: to abstain from violating his rights.

The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.

Bear in mind that the right to property is a right to action, like all the others: it is not the right to an object, but to the action and the consequences of producing or earning that object. It is not a guarantee that a man will earn any property, but only a guarantee that he will own it if he earns it. It is the right to gain, to keep, to use and to dispose of material values.

—Ayn Rand Lexicon

The Ayn Rand Lexicon: This mini-encyclopedia of Objectivism is compiled from Ayn Rand’s statements on some 400 topics in philosophy, economics, psychology and history.

aynrandlexicon.com

 

[Prince_Azmiran_Myrian]

The only "right" I believe in is the right to be free from sin. To that end we can absolutely impose on others. People are commiting suicide of the soul, and it's up to the government to take the gun out of their mouths. If they can't do at least that, then what the fuck are we even paying taxes for?

You shouldn't rely on the government to do that, as the government is partially the reason for it in the first place.
The other portion is spiritual warfare, arguably our jobs as christians to fight.

 

[SailusGebel]

How do you report a thread?

 

[Tyranomaster]

Every right is a constraint on the actions of others - if you have a right to clean air and water, I can't build a lead smelter next door and just pollute the fuck out of everything. (See also carbon emissions.)

If you have a right to property, I can't take your stuff.

If you have a right to privacy, that's more constraints on my behavior.

The US basic constitutional rights are self supporting, and don't suffer any of these logical issues.

You have no right to clean air or water (nor would you in nature for that matter).

All the other rights, such as free speech, search and seizure, quartering troops etc imply property and expression rights. Should the government attempt to force those, use your right to bear arms, and drive the tyrany out by force.

I would be willing to bet money that if the government attempted to force a citizen to house military personel, and the citizen said no, and the government did it anyway, then the citizen shot and killed those military personel, the supreme court would say they were within their rights to do so.

 

[Lloyd]

Slave revolts were a thing.

Epstein killed himself in prison.

You can never guarantee that forced labor will continue.

Thus, it isn't a right, just a constraint someone is attempting to force on you.

(Inb4 "the government could kill you so you don't have free speech")

Epstein didn't kill himself. It was Mossad.

 

[Succubiome]

The law locks up the man or woman
Who steals the goose off the common
But leaves the greater villain loose
Who steals the common from the goose.

The law demands that we atone
When we take things we do not own
But leaves the lords and ladies fine
Who takes things that are yours and mine.

The poor and wretched don’t escape
If they conspire the law to break;
This must be so but they endure
Those who conspire to make the law.

The law locks up the man or woman
Who steals the goose from off the common
And geese will still a common lack
Till they go and steal it back.

 

[Tyranomaster]

Epstein didn't kill himself. It was Mossad.

I agree that Epstein didn't actually kill himself in prison. (However prison suicides do occur so the point stands.)

 

[SailusGebel]

@AliceShiki help me.

 

[Tyranomaster]

The law locks up the man or woman
Who steals the goose off the common
But leaves the greater villain loose
Who steals the common from the goose.

The law demands that we atone
When we take things we do not own
But leaves the lords and ladies fine
Who takes things that are yours and mine.

The poor and wretched don’t escape
If they conspire the law to break;
This must be so but they endure
Those who conspire to make the law.

The law locks up the man or woman
Who steals the goose from off the common
And geese will still a common lack
Till they go and steal it back.

Nice poem.

In the US obesity affects even the poorest of poor.

We suffer from everyone eating too many geese.

The poem is less powerful when the word geese is replaced with "Current generation iPhone"