Are some individuals --- as Orwell wrote in Animal Farm --- 'more equal than others'?
Fundamentally, not at all. Where human relations are concerned, value shifts only with regard to subjective and external circumstances. Where nature is "concerned," value is proven by a human's ability to survive.
Or, are all individuals 'equal' with respect to their innate rights?
All humans are equal with respect to their innate rights. This is obvious because all humans are biologically compatible, containing the same self-expressing nature that marks us as of the same species.
Except for the attribute of MIGHT, no attribute in any single human is sufficient to objectively designate a human as worthy of determining which other innocent humans should live or die. If any human has MIGHT sufficient to execute and defend his declarations, then that human has the right in nature to make those declarations and execute them. Of course, the problem with this is, such a human remains a threat to the rights of every other human on earth. And when he executes to the detriment of other innocent humans, he destroys those who carry his own nature - hardly a basis for civilization.
And, finally, when is someone considered an individual with full rights of citizenship?
I am not trying to avoid your question, Buddy, but citizenship is an entirely different matter. It is arbitrary. An individual can exist in nature and validly never acquire citizenship in a country.
But the very moment a human is conceived, he acquires the fundamental right to exist and express as nature has designed him to express. This is true because he possesses essentially the same biological mark that gives us all identity and rights as "humans." The same process whereby he exists and expresses in nature is the same process whereby we exist and express in nature. To deny his fundamental right to exist and self-express is to deny our own right to exist and self-express. Such denial is obviously no basis for human civilization. |
