[Ditto]

So if a government does not recognize a right and withholds it from you, then it is not logical to think you have it, so it must not exist.

That is not what I said. You are twisting. I said that any government that would oppress either your legal and/or natural rights to the point of being intolerable would surely not respect a legal right to peaceful secession. In practical terms, you are only left with your natural right to revolution, which is why the very concept of a legal right to unilateral secession is an oxymoron.

Rights that cannot be claimed are not really rights. They are a fiction.

”If men were angles, there would be no need for government” -- J. Madison

[Arkinsaw]

That is not what I said. You are twisting. I said that any government that would oppress either your legal and/or natural rights to the point of being intolerable would surely not respect a legal right to peaceful secession. In practical terms, you are only left with your natural right to revolution, which is why the very concept of a legal right to unilateral secession is an oxymoron.

If the government came into your house and took all of your guns and imprisoned you without telling you charges and quartered troops in your house then you really don't have those rights because you can't exercise them and the only right you would have at that point is the right to revolution?

I beg to differ. These are God-given rights. They are not dependent on whether or not the government grants them, respects them, or illegitimately withholds them or prevents their exercise.

Rights that cannot be claimed are not really rights. They are a fiction.

No, our rights are God-given. They cannot be destroyed by a government preventing their exercise. The Tibetans have the right of self-determination and the right to be governed by a government of their choosing. The Chinese merely illegitimately prevent the exercise of those universal rights.