E4JarHead

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@worsematt Imagine defending Imperial Japan. That is crazy.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@BBGreatMoments Remember like a week ago when everyone tried to say players are taught to slide with their hands straight up?

Hmmm...

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@NotSoEvilShaman It says Asian-American not Gungan, lol.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@TSemanticore @StatisticUrban I think we just aren't talking about the same thing. I mostly agree with Locke et al on natural rights. My impression is that you're arguing from a constitutional/legal rights point of view. They are similar, but not the same.

I'm happy to agree to disagree, though.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@TSemanticore @StatisticUrban You saying "I would call it you not understanding what a right is." does not answer the question "What would you call having a right sometimes, but not always?"

You're arguing a strawman. Livings things do not have a right to grow, imo.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@RHaseman @eliec76 @GregWildSmith @StatisticUrban I was talking specifically about natural rights. Most things aren't rights. I'm not sure what your point is. Do you deny that self defense is a right?

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@eliec76 @GregWildSmith @StatisticUrban An enslaved person could always attempt to escape their enslavement. Many did. The probability of success is irrelevant as well. You can always attempt defense. The attempt can not be denied.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@StatisticUrban Alright I gotta bow out. It was fun, but the kid wants to play catch, which is infinitely more important than a philosophical debate on rights.

For those that were civil, I appreciate the discourse on the topic.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@StatisticUrban No, it doesn't. We as a society have decided to collectively do our absolute best to stop babies from starving to death, but that is not the same thing as saying the baby has a "human right" to not starve.

Things aren't human rights just because we want them to be.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@TSemanticore @StatisticUrban You can think that, but it doesn't answer the question.

There is no way, that I can think of, to stop a person from defending themselves; except, death. But all rights cease when you die. If that's the caveat you're stuck on then sure, natural rights can be violet by death.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@eliec76 @GregWildSmith @StatisticUrban The legality of self defense is a grey area for sure, but I'm speaking much more fundamentally. How can you be denied the exercise of self defense? You can be unjustly punished after the fact, 100%, but you can't be stopped from physically defending yourself.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@TSemanticore @StatisticUrban Let say, for the sake of argument, I agree. That means we don't actually have a "right to life", correct? Society can deemed it acceptable that you don't rendering the whole concept meaningless.

Re: Partial Rights. What would you call having a right sometimes, but not always?

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@TSemanticore @StatisticUrban It means our right to bodily autonomy is a partial right at best. I'm not arguing that all rights are "mystic properties that physically cannot be violated". There's nothing mystic about it. Most can be violated and, of course, we have to protect them.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@worthitformeme @StatisticUrban I certainly don't disagree that murder is wrong and should be punished. I just don't see how a legal construct proves we have a human right to life.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@worthitformeme @StatisticUrban There can be legal ramifications for killing a person, but that is not the same thing as having a "human right" to life.

Again, how can human beings have a "right to life" and abortion law co-exists? You either have a right to life or you do not. The death penalty is another ex.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@worthitformeme @StatisticUrban Maybe you haven't been talking about natural rights, but that's all I've been talking about this whole time. We are not above natural rights. Natural rights to not mean "the wild" nor does it mean we can't have other types of rights. It's not an either or situation.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@TSemanticore @StatisticUrban You have a right to defend yourself in all cases even if there are unjust consequences.

You can choose not to exercise this right, but it's a universal right that applies to all living things.

Punishment would actually be a violation of your right to liberty in this case.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@TSemanticore @StatisticUrban In your ex, lets say you pass out and the ER determines you've got appendicitis (actually happened to me). My wife gave the ER permission to remove it, but there are also procedures in place for the hospital to make that decision for you.

Another obvious situation is the draft.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@TSemanticore @StatisticUrban "As for abortion..." But we aren't talking about a person. Personhood is a different argument entirely.

We're talking a human right to life. I was even called a retard for suggesting humans don't have this right.

We don't always have the right to bodily autonomy either.

[E4JarHead @E4JarHead]

@LyonnTTV @ThotSmasherr @StatisticUrban I don't agree that defining something we can observe is the same as saying we made it up.