3 votes

My Rights!

My rights come from my capacity to declare them! My capacity to declare such rights as life and liberty come from the innateness of survival and the yearning to survive in a peaceful environment. My innateness of survival and yearning to survive in a peaceful environment are derived from consciousness - I do not need to employ or worship or plead with deities in order to understand that I am consciousness or that my capacity for consciousness is self-evident by my awareness of it.

My rights are declared by my mind and mouth and spirit...the implication of this post is demonstrate that my rights by mind, mouth and spirit are declared by a power or being responsible for consciousness, which if true defeats the entire purpose of consciousness itself. If consciousness was simply created for me as a spiritual being to realize my innateness for life and liberty then it is a manufactured event and trite in it's endeavor. I am not manufactured! I refuse to believe that my rights are completely realized by my conformity and submission to the idea that someone or something made them so. If they are in fact made, then they can in fact be taken away and I disavow that premise, God or not.

If we as lovers of liberty declare on one hand that rights are not granted by governmental bodies and regimes, how can we on the other say that they are granted by "God"? Regardless of who is the grantor of my rights, it all comes back to the same principle and that is if rights are granted and bestowed upon us they can be taken away. I would like to think that at some point we as evolving, spiritual beings would begin to realize the contradiction of this and the terminology by which we are lured into accepting rights as granted from one authority over another.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I up voted because...

we are getting to discuss rights.

In my opinion, rights are nothing more than an idea. The way I see this idea beginning is out of self-interest. I see you, I do not know you, and I do not wish for you to kill me. I also presume you do not know me and you do not want me to kill you. So we create this idea called a right to life and as long as it is respected you wont kill me and I wont kill you. The idea of rights then forms a basis for humanity, or how humans should treat other humans.

(life, not to be killed without cause, liberty, not to be enslaved or imprisoned without cause, property, not have my things taken from me without cause, pursuit of happiness, to be able to contract for time and labor as I see fit, etc.)

Basically the golden rule creates rights, Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. When Ron Paul spoke of this and was booed in a debate I felt humanity was lost.

Fortunately we have a government established on this idea of rights so even if others do not believe in the idea, it is able to be protected, by law.

The bill of rights lists a few of the basic rights that are fundamental and frankly do not really need to be mentioned, but if there are other rights I would like those people I interact with to be aware of I would be expected to notify them of those rights. That is also protected by our government in the 9th amendment.

This is all just my opinion though, the debate whether rights are god given or how ever they are bestowed seems irrelevant compared to whether they are being respected or not.

When you see police or civilians killing people without some sort of public trial to prove to humanity that there was cause to kill then the right of life has not been respected, when people are forced to get a permit or license to perform some job, then the right to pursuit of happiness has not been respected.

I am afraid the idea is fading if we do not start respecting the fundamental ones at least.


To quote an ancient maxim which should help with understanding this:

"We are slaves to the law that we may live free."

I'll bite.

I agree. Your rights come from your own autonomy. They are descriptive rather than prescriptive. They come from not what you ought be allowed to do, but you are capable of doing to serve your own self interest.

I dont have much to say other than I have written a few long posts here and they dont get much attention. I wish I could debate, but for the most part I agree.

I'm bumping this partly because I think more people should understand this, but mostly because I have a post that I spent years on, that said the same thing, and got as much attention as yours.

In case you wanna read it, its called "Government". It's lengthy and superfluous but offers alot of insight about my philosophy. Not that you should care.



No comments or discussion of any kind concerning rights on this site? Pleaseeeeee.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

This post was buried....

faster than Osama Bin Laden at sea.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness