Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: wagglebee
I want to stay alive, and I also want a million dollars. These are both legitimate desires, but only the former involves a fundamental right.

Even with something as basic as "life," we have to be careful using "rights" language, because every asserted right is the imposition of a duty on others. A "fundamental right to stay alive" would impose upon the rest of the world a duty to keep you alive. This is impossible, to start with.

In addition, the duty of others to safeguard your life is actually quite limited. They have a duty not to kill you except in immediate self defense. They have a duty to exercise care in activities that might harm you (or others), such as driving, shooting, or setting off fireworks.

However, they do not have a duty to take you for regular medical checkups. They do not have a duty to stop you from skateboarding, skydiving, or motorcycle-riding. They do not have a duty to force you to eat a healthy diet and get sensible exercise. And so on.

4 posted on 06/05/2015 9:25:53 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Everybody wants to be a cat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Tax-chick
However, they do not have a duty to take you for regular medical checkups. They do not have a duty to stop you from skateboarding, skydiving, or motorcycle-riding. They do not have a duty to force you to eat a healthy diet and get sensible exercise. And so on.

At least under Anglo-American law, there is not even a duty to assist someone who is sick or injured or otherwise in peril (unless you caused that situation). If you are drowning in a lake, and I am standing on the shore holding a life preserver, I have no legal obligation to throw it to you.

9 posted on 06/05/2015 11:41:47 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Tax-chick

Rather than saying that I have a right to life, or that “every baby is precious,” or “life is sacred”—all of which may be perfectly true—it is more coldly precise to say that no one should ever be permitted to commit murder. All acts of murder should be prevented, or, failing that, punished.


11 posted on 06/05/2015 12:04:28 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Tax-chick

“Even with something as basic as “life,” we have to be careful using “rights” language, because every asserted right is the imposition of a duty on others. A “fundamental right to stay alive” would impose upon the rest of the world a duty to keep you alive. This is impossible, to start with.”

This once again starts from a false presumption of the nature of rights again given to us by the leftist attempts at redefinign that concept.

A right is not a service or that which is garroted by others but rather that which one has independent of others and is protected from the usurpation of others.

The key difference between a right and an entitlement is a right stands on its own just as you live without interference.

Having a right to life, liberty, or property does not mean others must provide for your life, liberty or property merely that you have theses things and others should not act to take them away.


18 posted on 06/07/2015 7:19:53 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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