Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (21367)	7/19/2005 4:12:42 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 28931

"in picking up that argument you agree to assume that we are all talking about one thing." Huh? "To forfeit freedom (an incompatible notion with inalienable right)..." Oh, God! Not that again! Inalienable does not mean that it is literally an impossibility to violate such a right (why would we need laws if that were true?) or to compromise or forfeit such a right, in spite of what Webster's says. What it means is that these are our "natural" rights, "endowed by our Creator" if you don't mind a vague implication of a religious basis, as opposed to something granted to us by other men. If, for example, one commits murder, one has not only violated another's inalienable rights, but also forfeits his or her right to liberty - and possibly to life. If one acquires ownership of a piece of land, then because of one's property rights, from which one derives the right to build a fence to secure one's land, others are deprived of a little bit of their liberty in that they may no longer cross that land or use it to graze their sheep or cattle. In fact, the seller of the land has voluntarily forfeited his property rights in that land in exchange for something else. So let's drop this silly argument that "inalienable" rights can't be forfeited, ok? "you are under the assumption that it is human beings with rights that are being forfeited." As opposed to what? Cows with rights being forfeited? Sorry, gem. No offense intended, but I don't see what point you are trying to make.