The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site immediately. For more, read the


Comment: Where
Where
Do our rights come from seems to be the thrust of this post, it seems. There are three arguments I hear most commonly. The God Given Rights argument, the Natural Law argument and a utilitarian based argument. Of all these arguments, I tend to favor the God given rights one and the Natural Law one reasonates with me as well, and is verycompatible with the God Given Rights argument.
Utilitarian based arguments are, in my opinion, the least constructive towards liberty, as utilitarian arguments for liberty are that the maximum good for the maximum amount of people is why liberty should be supported, yet this leaves open the possibility that should maximum good come out of violating liberty, then it is perfectly acceptable and just to violate liberty.
It seems that the most reliable arguments in favor of liberty are the God Given Rights argument and the Natural Law argument. Though it is desirable that the maximum good for the maximum amount of people should happen, it would be a fallacy to base the spirit and the letter of law off of utilitarian principles.