Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: YHAOS
Proposition: States (that is, ruling regimes) have powers; private individuals do (or don’t) have rights, according to their ruling legal document(s).

I was thinking to engender some dialogue, but . . . guess not.

Is it not true that individuals do (or don't) have rights whether they are private individuals or not?

Is it not true that some rights, such as the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are not dependent on ruling legal documents? Admittedly, there are some rights dependent on ruling legal documents, just not all of them.

If the above is true and you're defining a State as a ruling regime (which I'm not sure I would), and a ruling regime consists of individuals as it must, would not the State have rights because the State is a ruling regime which is individuals who have rights?

179 posted on 01/11/2014 10:09:42 PM PST by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies ]


To: KrisKrinkle; Vaquero; Wyrd bið ful aræd
would not the State have rights because the State is a ruling regime

How would these “rights” of a state be described, except as powers?

294 posted on 01/13/2014 4:00:03 PM PST by YHAOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson