> "the ability to do X without legal consequence from the government" That would be, 'it's not illegal'. I think there are four different things in play here.

> "the ability to do X without legal consequence from the government" That would be, 'it's not illegal'. I think there are four different things in play here. a) a fundamental right, because you are human; this is something that a government ought to respect. b) something which the government has said is legal to do; i.e., something the goverment says is OK. c) the responsibilities which a citizen must bear; or, what happens if you break the law d) the rights to which a citizen is entitled: the respect which the government actually gives you. I guess I conflated some of those things. > If you define "right" as "you have the ability to do X and face legal consequences for having done it," That would be a combination of (a) and (c), where you have the human right to say what you please, but as a citizen you have to deal with the consequences. That's different from, say, murder, where you don't have the human right to murder and you also broke the law (and have to face the consequences). It's a trivial distinction in most cases, but not all.