4 ms·
> Isn't that basically saying that surviving needn't be in a definition of 'human right'? Yes, because "surviving" isn't a human right. It's something we, as a
by RHSeeger 4y ago
> Isn't that basically saying that surviving needn't be in a definition of 'human right'?
Yes, because "surviving" isn't a human right. It's something we, as a society, should do our best to make sure everyone is able to do, but that's not the same as saying it's a human right. If it was, then "not having a heart attack" would be a human right, which is clearly ridiculous.
- mxkopy 4y agoNot so clear to me. If some company flooded a river with heart attack inducing chemicals, would you say that's fine because not having heart attacks isn't a human right? I'll put it to you like this. If you believe there is a human right, then someone can't pursue it if they're dead. So if, in order to pursue that right, they need to pursue being alive, the pursuit of being alive falls within that right, no?