Which of these is a right?

[Oh, Gee!!]

all of 'em

[Darrin]

I think youre confusing what "right" means in the American government sense.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain, unalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

We have a higher authority in our laws than the government--we have the creator. Our creator made us need nourishment, rest, and shelter.

When a government uses the word "right", it refers to something they protect and/or provide.

On those grounds, food and water do not apply. Government does not provide and/or protect either.

They do in the form of food stamps with certain incomes. They provide drinking water at most national parks and libraries. Those are all government-run ins utions.

Education is not a right. Its treated like one now, but it is not a right. One could argue that because education is treated as a right in today's version of America, we have a dumbed-down society full of underachievers and reality show heads.

This is throwing out the baby with the bathwater or blaming existence for death and disease. Knowledge breeds understanding, confidence, and trust. To deny a child those things is to create not just a willfully stupid society, but an ignorant one without the ability to grasp the material and tools past down from generation to generation.

Food, shelter...again, not rights protected by the government. Im starting to get the feeling here that I am completely outnumbered by people who think life guarantees them anything remotely nearing the scope of this thread.

I, as a tax paying citizen, do not owe my fellow citizens like healthcare, food, shelter or water. Nor you to me.

Why? What is more fundamental than that? It is a need provided by the creator or we cease to function.

Because some of you would do these things for others by way of public taxation and treasury does not mean we all want to. That is my ing right.

Too bad. Amend the laws because taxpayer money is used everyday to feed and cloth and shelter people who cannot do it themselves. Most private organizations do not rely on donations alone; they get taxpayer money.

[23LeBronJames23]

Guns, freedom and love

[SonOfAGun]

brb, installing refrigerated mail box

[ElNono]

brb, installing refrigerated mail box

LOL... I assume you have a right to cold beer?

[ElNono]

They do in the form of food stamps with certain incomes. They provide drinking water at most national parks and libraries. Those are all government-run ins utions.

In the specific case of food stamps, it's a service provided by the state under certain qualifications. If it would be a right, then nobody would need to meet a required criteria in order to obtain them.
As far as complimentary drinking water, well, it's just that, a complimentary service. That they offer it doesn't imply it's your right to have it. They could stop offering said service at any given time and the only right you would have is to go somewhere else to get it.

[baseline bum]

Since our government has ensured love is not a good to be sold, then it must be a right.

[DarkReign]

We have a higher authority in our laws than the government--we have the creator. Our creator made us need nourishment, rest, and shelter.

...

Too bad. Amend the laws because taxpayer money is used everyday to feed and cloth and shelter people who cannot do it themselves. Most private organizations do not rely on donations alone; they get taxpayer money.

You and I fundamentally differ on the role of government in society. As in, wholesale disagreement in totality. I dont believe it is the right of citizens to be provided for by other citizens by force of law.

Unequivocally, thats my belief.

Now, if you want to argue what is good and what is right, thats another argument entirely. But the question is, what is a right by Cons ution in this country.

By that definition, food and shelter certainly do not apply. Education is debatable.

[Trainwreck2100]

They do in the form of food stamps with certain incomes. They provide drinking water at most national parks and libraries. Those are all government-run ins utions.

The fact food stamps are only available to a certain % of the population shows its not apart of the cons ution rights the people who don't need foodstamps end up paying for their own food and the people on foodstamps food

[SonOfAGun]

I wonder what American pioneers of the West would think about present day Americans LOL

[Trainwreck2100]

I wonder what American pioneers of the West would think about present day Americans LOL

they'd let the brits win

[Wild Cobra]

I wonder what American pioneers of the West would think about present day Americans LOL

They'd be calling these liberals all kinds of their equivalent words of pussy!

[Marcus Bryant]

They'd be calling these liberals all kinds of their equivalent words of pussy!

So it is in the cartoonish version of American history. You might be surprised at what they'd have to say about a military groupie such as yourself.

[LnGrrrR]

Programs such as welfare, public education and funded libraries are there because they are grounded in the reasoning that the state will function smoother without wealth es and crashes, with better education, etc etc.

This does not imply there's a "right" to such things, merely that the majority agreed to set aside X amount of money to fund these things for the public.

[Supergirl]

I think the responses to this poll are very interesting.

Personally, the only thing I *WANT* out of a government is protection for me and my fellow citizens - protection from starvation, homelessness, illness, and violence as much as possible. WHich is not to say the government should always protect these rights in all cir stances - it has to balance the needs of the rest of the country and the other citizens, and America was founded on very John Stuart Mill utilitarian principles.

But if the government does not exist to protect us, in some capacity (to what degree is always a question for debate and discussion) then in my mind it might as well not exist. That is not libertarianism, that is anarchy. The absence of any government whatsoever. And I have said since I was in high school that I would be an anarchist if I trusted human beings more to look out for each other. But I don't, and I would argue this is just being realistic. Without government we would destroy each other. , we try to find ways to destroy each other within the rules of government, or without being caught.

[LnGrrrR]

Uhm... America wasn't founded on John Stuart Mill utilitarian principles, considering he wasn't born yet. It was founded mostly by theories from Locke, some from Voltaire, and a little bit from Hobbes.

[Marcus Bryant]

Programs such as welfare, public education and funded libraries are there because they are grounded in the reasoning that the state will function smoother without wealth es and crashes, with better education, etc etc.

Right, the state and economy will function "better" with "education" of a certain kind...

[Marcus Bryant]

Uhm... America wasn't founded on John Stuart Mill utilitarian principles, considering he wasn't born yet. It was founded mostly by theories from Locke, some from Voltaire, and a little bit from Hobbes.

Oh well, it was a republic, until our forebears let it get away.

[LnGrrrR]

But if the government does not exist to protect us, in some capacity (to what degree is always a question for debate and discussion) then in my mind it might as well not exist. That is not libertarianism, that is anarchy. The absence of any government whatsoever. And I have said since I was in high school that I would be an anarchist if I trusted human beings more to look out for each other. But I don't, and I would argue this is just being realistic. Without government we would destroy each other. , we try to find ways to destroy each other within the rules of government, or without being caught.

Uhmm anarchy is very different than what you're describing. Are you talking about the general idea of anarchy, or the actual political term anarchy? You know, there have been one or two anarchies in history... Spain the most famous.

Government is there to PROTECT your rights. The legislative branch writes laws that protect your rights, the executive ensures those laws are carried out, and the judicial branch ensures your rights have been maintained.

Feeling the 'need' of government to protect people from killing/attacking/hurting each other is silly. As you point out, with or without government, people will destroy/hurt each other anyways.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy

Spain 1936
After General Francisco Franco declared war on the Spanish government in 1936 (Spanish civil war) the government lost control over much of Spain. Resistance to the rebels was often organized through the confederation of anarcho-syndicalist trade unions, the Confederación Nacional del Trabajo (CNT) and the Iberian Anarchist Federation, the Federación Anarquista Ibérica (FAI). The Spanish Revolution occurred almost immediately after the failed coup of Franco, leading to the formation of worker's collectives all over Republican Spain. This has been hailed as the best example of a functioning anarchist system. Anarchists were instrumental in keeping the country running and holding back the Francoists, until they were attacked by the Republican government and their Communist allies. The government was subsequently defeated by Franco, leading to 40 years of Francoist dictatorship in Spain.

[LnGrrrR]

Right, the state and economy will function "better" with "education" of a certain kind...

Hey, I'm just explaining the thought process behind it; not claiming validity or lack thereof.

[ElNono]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe feudalism is what predates the establishment of an organized state, not anarchy.

[Marcus Bryant]

Hey, I'm just explaining the thought process behind it; not claiming validity or lack thereof.

I know, but we take at face value a certain version of how those things originated.

[Marcus Bryant]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe feudalism is what predates the establishment of an organized state, not anarchy.

Right. How radical a notion that all were of equal standing before the law and had fundamental rights which were inviolable. But, hey, thems just made up rights.

[Bender]

But if the government does not exist to protect us, in some capacity (to what degree is always a question for debate and discussion) then in my mind it might as well not exist.

the Gov't wants us all to think of it as a Provider and Protector, because people just can't take care of themselves, they NEED the Gov't to tell them what to do, what to think, what to like, what to not like...

[spurster]

Rights = "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"

Responsibilities = I work and pay for my needs if I can; I also work for and pay for the common good. My actions do not impinge on other's liberties.

Does the right to life include a right to basic health care? I think the modern-day interpretation is moving toward this.