18 ms·
>It is subject to different rules. A person acting under the auspices of a state has no right to violate human rights. A state is merely a human construct. No
by aminok 10y ago
>It is subject to different rules.
A person acting under the auspices of a state has no right to violate human rights. A state is merely a human construct. No human construct grants a person a right to violate human rights.
- JumpCrisscross 10y ago> No human construct grants a person a right to violate human rights Human rights are a human construct. Moreover, they only make sense within the context of social contract which only becomes practical when enforced by a government.
- aminok 10y agoThey're not a conditional construct. They are by definition universal. When something is a human right, we consider it to be an inalienable right that no party has a right to violate. And 'social contract' is double speak. It's an attempt to misappropriate the concept of a contract to confer moral legitimacy to majority dictates.