4 ms·
What is a human right to you then? I think of human rights as those things required by all humans to live and be healthy, but you must have your own definition.
by 369548684892826 4y ago
What is a human right to you then? I think of human rights as those things required by all humans to live and be healthy, but you must have your own definition.
- drstewart 4y agoProbably a case of negative rights versus positive rights https://alabamapolicy.org/research/understanding-the-difference-between-positive-and-negative-rights/ https://alabamapolicy.org/research/understanding-the-differe...
- tstrimple 4y agoThat’s just the latest justification for the lack of critical thinking around what actually constitutes a right. Those “negative vs positive” rights people don’t seem to have any problem with the “right to an attorney, if you cannot afford one then one will be provided for you”. It’s always been an incredibly disingenuous argument.
- jrochkind1 4y agoI mean, plenty of them do, actually... I agree with you, and I think what takes it apart is starting to think about the fact that humans are social, it is not really possible to be fully human apart from a community. The idea of an independent individual unreliant on anyone else as a starting point, which I think is the basis of this "negative vs postive rights" framework, is a myth, is not how humans work. The questions are what kinds of communities we want, how we want to relate to each other -- not whether to.
- drstewart 4y agoSorry, this is a strawman argument. You just claim without proof that all of these people have no problem with some random right and therefore the argument is disingenuous? There are definitely people that don't think a right to a free attorney should be a right. There are also people who think that it's okay for this to exist but doesn't necessarily correspond to the same level of a right as a negative right like free speech. These are entirely consistent positions to hold.
- nemo44x 4y agoIt’s not a human right to have an attorney. It’s done by the government to legitimize its courts. It’s difficult to justify the use of force (court system and associated outcomes) if those you accuse of violating the state do not have the ability to competently defend themselves from the accusations.