4 ms·
>You are not born with rights This argument is really semantic. The line always devolve to the tautological "the only rules of the universe are physical rules
by diskcat 11y ago
>You are not born with rights
This argument is really semantic.
The line always devolve to the tautological "the only rules of the universe are physical rules"
- sitkack 11y agoDon't forget Bitcoin. If didn't happen on the block chain it didn't happen.
- Laaw 11y agoThat's not tautological at all. Also, it's not really true. There are plenty of rules. What I'm saying is the only "unalienable" rules are the laws of the physical universe. Every other rule is a construct of society and people, and as such, is not guaranteed in the way as stated by the previous commenter. It's just something I believe is worth keeping in mind when talking about your "right to privacy", specifically. There are many prominent public figures who actually don't believe you have that right at all, and when we remember that rights (as we're referring to them) are granted only by the grace of the state, if the members of the state don't believe you have a right, then you simply don't. The argument here should be more about whether or not it's in the state's best interest to grant the right to privacy to its citizens, and I think there's a pretty strong argument in favor of that, but simply stating "I have a right!" doesn't illuminate that argument very much.