Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 160 (8147 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-31-2014 4:20 AM
65 online now:
Heathen, Mr Jack (2 members, 63 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: prof premraj pushpakaran
Post Volume:
Total: 739,050 Year: 24,891/28,606 Month: 2,192/1,786 Week: 407/647 Day: 12/79 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1112
13
1415
...
20Next
Author Topic:   radical liberals (aka liberal commies) vs ultra conservatives (aka nutjobs)
jar
Member
Posts: 24784
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 181 of 300 (659760)
04-18-2012 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by Taq
04-18-2012 2:07 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
I have seen no evidence that human rights exist except within the context of a State, culture or society.

Since there are no human rights outside of that context then there is no way can they can be violated.

And of course laws exist and are not abstract entities.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Taq, posted 04-18-2012 2:07 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by Taq, posted 04-18-2012 5:20 PM jar has responded

  
AdminModulous
Administrator
Posts: 878
Joined: 03-02-2006


Message 182 of 300 (659761)
04-18-2012 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by Taq
04-18-2012 2:07 PM


human rights ..
Maybe this discussion deserves to have a thread dedicated to it. I know this is Free For All, so this is just a suggestion.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Taq, posted 04-18-2012 2:07 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by Taq, posted 04-18-2012 5:31 PM AdminModulous has acknowledged this reply

    
Cat Sci
Member
Posts: 9531
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 183 of 300 (659762)
04-18-2012 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by Taq
04-18-2012 2:07 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
Writing them down does not make them any more real than human rights.

Yeah, but I can see a real effect from legal rights - I'll get a fine if I'm speeding.

But telling that african slave that's starving in the desert that he has rights and ought not be treated like that doesn't do him a goddamned thing.

And on that basis I can see that legal rights are more real natural ones.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Taq, posted 04-18-2012 2:07 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Taq, posted 04-18-2012 5:29 PM Cat Sci has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 5276
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 184 of 300 (659785)
04-18-2012 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by jar
04-18-2012 2:12 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
I have seen no evidence that human rights exist except within the context of a State, culture or society.

I presented that evidence outside of the context of a state, culture, or society. You flatly dismissed it without explaining why. I was hoping that you could explain why you reject the conclusion drawn from the premises.

And of course laws exist and are not abstract entities.

Then I will take the jar tack. I have seen no evidence that laws exist outside of being abstract entities.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by jar, posted 04-18-2012 2:12 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by jar, posted 04-18-2012 6:08 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 5276
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 185 of 300 (659787)
04-18-2012 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by Cat Sci
04-18-2012 2:28 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
Yeah, but I can see a real effect from legal rights - I'll get a fine if I'm speeding.

There are also real effects from human rights violations, such as economic sanctions and being convicted in international courts (e.g. the Hague).

South Africa suffered economic sanctions in the mid 1980's in response to human rights violations. This sanction was not based on codified US law. It was based on the argument that violating human rights is wrong.

But telling that african slave that's starving in the desert that he has rights and ought not be treated like that doesn't do him a goddamned thing.

The fact that we can point to injustices is evidence that human rights do exist. How can we say that something is wrong unless we have a set of human rights to compare them to?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Cat Sci, posted 04-18-2012 2:28 PM Cat Sci has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by Cat Sci, posted 04-18-2012 5:50 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 5276
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 186 of 300 (659788)
04-18-2012 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by AdminModulous
04-18-2012 2:12 PM


Re: human rights ..
Maybe this discussion deserves to have a thread dedicated to it. I know this is Free For All, so this is just a suggestion.

Liberalism has its roots in Enlightenment philosophy as it relates to natural rights and equality. Human rights form the very foundation of liberalism.

quote:
The early liberal thinker John Locke, who is often credited for the creation of liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition, employed the concept of natural rights and the social contract to argue that the rule of law should replace absolutism in government, that rulers were subject to the consent of the governed, and that private individuals had a fundamental right to life, liberty, and property.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by AdminModulous, posted 04-18-2012 2:12 PM AdminModulous has acknowledged this reply

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 186 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 187 of 300 (659790)
04-18-2012 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Taq
04-18-2012 1:35 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
Taq writes:

As a general rule, they do.

Panda writes:

But since it is not 100% true, it undermines your claims of human rights being intrinsic.

Taq writes:

It is intrinsic. It is still there even in those suffering pain. If they felt there was another option to end their pain I am sure they would take that option instead of death.


You agree it is not 100% therefore it is not intrinsic.
By definition, something is not intrinsic if not everyone has it.
You really need to look up what these words mean before you continue using them.

Taq writes:

There is not a 10% fatality rate, and the death rate is about the same as driving down the freeway.


Your reply has not even attempted to support your premise.
Your 2nd premise remains false.

Taq writes:

Panda writes:

We can also tell that people don't fear death.
Premise 3 fails to support your conclusion.


Then you seem to agree with me that empathy works.

Then you seem to agree with me that premise 3 fails to support your conclusion.

Panda writes:

Causing people to be scared of death may or may not be an ok thing to do. It depends.
There is no human right pertinent to deciding which is correct.

Taq writes:

How did you determine this?


Because if there was a pertinent human right then you would have stated it and not replied with the impossible demand for me to "prove a negative".
Even you (who continues to assert the existence of human rights) are unable to supply a single human right which isn't situational, conditional and subjective.

In summary: you have failed to substantiate any of your claims regarding human rights.


Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Taq, posted 04-18-2012 1:35 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by Taq, posted 04-19-2012 11:10 AM Panda has responded

  
Cat Sci
Member
Posts: 9531
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 188 of 300 (659791)
04-18-2012 5:50 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by Taq
04-18-2012 5:29 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
There are also real effects from human rights violations, such as economic sanctions and being convicted in international courts (e.g. the Hague).

Do those go against individuals, or are they more for entire countries?

South Africa suffered economic sanctions in the mid 1980's in response to human rights violations. This sanction was not based on codified US law. It was based on the argument that violating human rights is wrong.

I'd like to see the basis for the argument myself.

The fact that we can point to injustices is evidence that human rights do exist. How can we say that something is wrong unless we have a set of human rights to compare them to?

Well, you could draft some legal rights

But the human rights only need to exist in our imagination for us to point to injustices. They don't really exist out in reality, they're just make-believe.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Taq, posted 04-18-2012 5:29 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by jar, posted 04-18-2012 6:13 PM Cat Sci has acknowledged this reply
 Message 196 by Taq, posted 04-19-2012 11:27 AM Cat Sci has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24784
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 189 of 300 (659792)
04-18-2012 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by Taq
04-18-2012 5:20 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
taq writes:

I presented that evidence outside of the context of a state, culture, or society. You flatly dismissed it without explaining why. I was hoping that you could explain why you reject the conclusion drawn from the premises.

Then provide a link to the post where you presented such evidence.

taq writes:

I have seen no evidence that laws exist outside of being abstract entities.

You are free of course to take such a position. I will warn you though that taking such a position may well lead to your incarceration in very non-abstract prisons.

Your example of South Africa is yet another great example to support my position. Restrictions and sanctions were placed against South Africa ONLY because States, cultures and societies decided to enact certain limited rights as "human rights". But even there, it was ONLY within the context of that limited incident. It was only when South Africa decided that within the context of South Africa the State, society and culture would grant those limited rights that for South Africans those rights even existed even in the limited scope that exists.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Taq, posted 04-18-2012 5:20 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by NoNukes, posted 04-18-2012 7:47 PM jar has responded
 Message 195 by Taq, posted 04-19-2012 11:16 AM jar has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24784
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 190 of 300 (659793)
04-18-2012 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by Cat Sci
04-18-2012 5:50 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
Actually, the US Sanctions were very much based in US Law.

The corporate sanctions were based on societal pressure.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Cat Sci, posted 04-18-2012 5:50 PM Cat Sci has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 5510
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 191 of 300 (659801)
04-18-2012 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by jar
04-18-2012 6:08 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
It was only when South Africa decided that within the context of South Africa the State, society and culture would grant those limited rights that for South Africans those rights even existed even in the limited scope that exists.

This is an extremely Anglican and distorted view of the situation in South Africa. Unless only the society and culture of the minority white, ruling population counted, there is simply no math that suggests the vast majority of the society and culture of South Africans did not acknowledge the rights of black South Africans prior to the point where the government decided to grant them.

A more fact based analysis would be that apartheid was a denial of basic human rights by a minority government and society in a superior position to wrongly deny basic human rights.

I'm not going to take on the position of whether those human rights are natural rights.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by jar, posted 04-18-2012 6:08 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by jar, posted 04-18-2012 7:55 PM NoNukes has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 24784
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 192 of 300 (659803)
04-18-2012 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by NoNukes
04-18-2012 7:47 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
It is an acknowledgement of fact.

Until South Africa decided that blacks had rights, the blacks did not have rights.

When you say "A more fact based analysis would be that apartheid was a denial of basic human rights by a minority government and society in a superior position to wrongly deny basic human rights." I could almost agree with you if you changed it to "A more fact based analysis would be that apartheid as seen by some States, cultures and societies outside South Africa, was, in the opinion of those outside States, cultures and societies, a denial of basic human rights by a minority government and society in a superior position to wrongly deny basic human rights."


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by NoNukes, posted 04-18-2012 7:47 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Taq, posted 04-19-2012 11:05 AM jar has responded
 Message 206 by NoNukes, posted 04-19-2012 3:39 PM jar has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 5276
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 193 of 300 (659857)
04-19-2012 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 192 by jar
04-18-2012 7:55 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
Until South Africa decided that blacks had rights, the blacks did not have rights.

Blacks had human rights the entire time. The government was violating those rights.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by jar, posted 04-18-2012 7:55 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by jar, posted 04-19-2012 12:45 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 5276
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 194 of 300 (659858)
04-19-2012 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 187 by Panda
04-18-2012 5:49 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
You agree it is not 100% therefore it is not intrinsic.

You didn't even comment on what I actually said. Here it is again:

"It is still there even in those suffering pain. If they felt there was another option to end their pain I am sure they would take that option instead of death."

Your reply has not even attempted to support your premise.
Your 2nd premise remains false.

Your premise that people go on carnival rides because they risk death is falsified. My premise remains.

Then you seem to agree with me that premise 3 fails to support your conclusion.

We can use empathy to understand that people in great pain still would rather not die if there was any other way to rid them of pain. The premise still stands.

Because if there was a pertinent human right then you would have stated it and not replied with the impossible demand for me to "prove a negative".

Perhaps you should not make claims that rely on a universal negative.

Even you (who continues to assert the existence of human rights) are unable to supply a single human right which isn't situational, conditional and subjective.

I have supplied three: life, liberty, and property.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by Panda, posted 04-18-2012 5:49 PM Panda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Panda, posted 04-19-2012 12:06 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 5276
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 195 of 300 (659859)
04-19-2012 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 189 by jar
04-18-2012 6:08 PM


Re: A statist by any other name...
Then provide a link to the post where you presented such evidence.

http://www.evcforum.net/dm.php?control=msg&m=659612

You are free of course to take such a position. I will warn you though that taking such a position may well lead to your incarceration in very non-abstract prisons.

Just as people have been imprisoned for violations of human rights.

Your example of South Africa is yet another great example to support my position. Restrictions and sanctions were placed against South Africa ONLY because States, cultures and societies decided to enact certain limited rights as "human rights".

The actions taken by the government were based on consensus. They were justified by the principle of human rights which are universal and inalienable.

It was only when South Africa decided that within the context of South Africa the State, society and culture would grant those limited rights that for South Africans those rights even existed even in the limited scope that exists.

They existed the entire time. That is why sanctions were put in place, because the government was violating their human rights.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by jar, posted 04-18-2012 6:08 PM jar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by Panda, posted 04-19-2012 12:09 PM Taq has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1112
13
1415
...
20Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014