Batteground Walmart

[countingbeans]

[quote]atypical1 wrote:
Slavery and segregation was a right but people fought against that and for their own freedom. If they didn’t fight, if they didn’t struggle then they wouldn’t have those rights. Throughout history people haven’t just sat back and expected something. They fought for it. Whether the fight was through words or through swords, the result was all the same. [/quote]

Yes, people have been fighting their and other governments over their natural rights for a long long time. That is half my point.

Bu they fought people taking them away (or to take other’s away). They have alwasy been there.

North Korea can be free. They can have the same rights as the south but they have to be willing to fight and die for it. And that’s a very hard thing to do and it might not work.

Correct. Their government stifles their rights. It isn’t that they aren’t there, they are there, the government is just broken.

And I disagree about our government being set up to defend natural rights.

Well, then why was the bill of rights (detailed listing of the basic natural rights) written?

The government as a whole? Fine, no it isn’t. But that section certianly was.

[zecarlo]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

but yes you have the right to make others miserable if you like.
[/quote]

Women take advantage of that right every time they get a man to marry them.

[H_factor]

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
What rights are those? [/quote]

These are laid out pretty clearly over and over again throughout history.

Exactly the stuff we SAY you have a right to be protected from other people infringing upon.

No. We don’t say what is a right or isn’t. We say what the government allows under the law.

You are confusing rights and government. They aren’t the same. One limits the other.

The natural part is just to say that this is what you get by being born, by being a human being.

Correct

Of course these are malleable, why wouldn’t they be?

Because to change them to would be infringe on them.

Why was it ok to establish these 200 hundred years ago but not now?

Again, you are confusing government with rights. I thought you were a libertairian?

We didn’t establish rights. We established a government that wasn’t supposed to trample them.

Rights were there before mankind noticed them. They will be there when we stop ignoring them in the future, and stop calling every thing we want a right. [/quote]

Lol, yes we DO say what is a right. The Declaration of Independence clearly states all men have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It also clearly states that governments are established to protect these rights. This is what the founders believe and I think what a large majority of us continue to believe. But these are our rights because this is precisely what the founders said were our rights. Over and over again they said we have a right to this stuff and we WILL protect these rights in our new government. It is the sole reason for creating government they said.

And if you don’t think they are malleable look at education. The people (well government, but all the same thing) essentially MADE this a new right. Of course they can do that. We could argue if they should or not all day long, but of course they CAN. Of course we have that ability. Why the hell wouldn’t we? Again, we did 200 years ago. Why couldn’t we take this away?

[pittbulll]

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

but yes you have the right to make others miserable if you like.
[/quote]

Women take advantage of that right every time they get a man to marry them. [/quote]

LOL:)

[anon50325502]

Again Pitt and now H Factor, you’re just wrong in this case.

Is Heathcare a Right? - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Read what former New Jersey judge Andrew Napolitano has to say about t rights vs. Goods.

[zecarlo]

Is the right to bear firearms a natural right that existed before it was an amendment…and before they were invented?

[anon50325502]

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Is the right to bear firearms a natural right that existed before it was an amendment…and before they were invented? [/quote]

I think the tight to defend yourself is a natural right and the second amendment is an obvious progression of this natural right.

[countingbeans]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

These are laid out pretty clearly over and over again throughout history.
[/quote]

I have to go all Religious on you , God gave me my rights , no one else
[/quote]

Correct. Some people call it nature, some people call it god, or God… Whatever you call it, on this we agree.

[countingbeans]

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Is the right to bear firearms a natural right that existed before it was an amendment…and before they were invented? [/quote]

I think the tight to defend yourself is a natural right and the second amendment is an obvious progression of this natural right.[/quote]

Agreed.

The 2nd is both liberty and life. The liberty to defend your life, and the ability to defend your liberty.

[pittbulll]

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Again Pitt and now H Factor, you’re just wrong in this case.

Is Heathcare a Right? - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Read what former New Jersey judge Andrew Napolitano has to say about t rights vs. Goods.[/quote]

I gree with what I have read , I do not see where Napolitano is saying I am wrong .

[countingbeans]

[quote]H factor wrote:
But these are our rights because this is precisely what the founders said were our rights.[/quote]

No. These are our rights because they are our rights. The founders said the government, in America, will protect them.

It is like saying, “the Sun shines because we said it does”. Well, yes we created the word “shine” and gave it its meaning, but we didn’t make the Sun shine…

Over and over again they said we have a right to this stuff and we WILL protect these rights in our new government. It is the sole reason for creating government they said.

I’ve said as much as well.

And if you don’t think they are malleable look at education. The people (well government, but all the same thing) essentially MADE this a new right.

No, it is a government provided service that everyone has “equal” access to. Education isn’t a right. Some felt it was the duty of government to educate people, even though the people at the time knew quite a bit more history than the people of today, and they didn’t have google…

[quote]Of course they can do that. We could argue if they should or not all day long, but of course they CAN. Of course we have that ability. Why the hell wouldn’t we? Again, we did 200 years ago. Why couldn’t we take this away?

[/quote]

Of course you can take rights, doens’t mean they aren’t there… (I mean, hense the revolution, lol) You can legislate anything you want, you can call it a right all day, doesn’t mean it is one.

I call Ducks quackers… Does that mean they aren’t ducks anymore?

[anon50325502]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Again Pitt and now H Factor, you’re just wrong in this case.

Is Heathcare a Right? - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Read what former New Jersey judge Andrew Napolitano has to say about t rights vs. Goods.[/quote]

I gree with what I have read , I do not see where Napolitano is saying I am wrong .
[/quote]

…and that’s why you give me a headache. He, which I completely agree, is saying Healthcare is a good not a right. Same with labor. Is that now what you have been saying for days now?

[pittbulll]

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Again Pitt and now H Factor, you’re just wrong in this case.

Is Heathcare a Right? - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Read what former New Jersey judge Andrew Napolitano has to say about t rights vs. Goods.[/quote]

I gree with what I have read , I do not see where Napolitano is saying I am wrong .
[/quote]

…and that’s why you give me a headache. He, which I completely agree, is saying Healthcare is a good not a right. Same with labor. Is that now what you have been saying for days now?[/quote]

It is a right to pursue that which is good

[H_factor]

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Again Pitt and now H Factor, you’re just wrong in this case.

Is Heathcare a Right? - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Read what former New Jersey judge Andrew Napolitano has to say about t rights vs. Goods.[/quote]

I would disagree even though I agree with the overall point. Our rights are simply things that we have deemed necessary to protect. Essential to our liberty (something else we have deemed necessary to protect). I’ve already illustrated the problem with making a good also be a right (essentially because of cost), but I still see no reason why this COULDN’T be. Who says it couldn’t? And most importantly why not?

I can list out tons of reasons for why we shouldn’t, but not so many for why we CAN’T. We established these rights as things necessary to protect and defend. We (man) did this in this country with our Constitution. It’s reasoning is clearly stated in our Declaration of Independence.

Again, have we NOT changed our bill of rights already? The courts do this by establishing what is meant by the phrase or how the phrase should be interpreted. This changes over time.

All I’m saying is we can essentially make anything a right because we “made” the rights we currently have. By made them I don’t mean we weren’t given the ability to speak freely from the government. Or to write freely. Our own free will allows us to do that. But it also allows us to do WHATEVER we want. I mean we are born able to hurt others if we so choose. We made certain things so important we said it was worth protecting.

It certainly HELPS to have these things essentially be costless ideas and not goods. But again I’d argue where are we getting the idea it CAN’T be anything different? It already has been over and over.

[pittbulll]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:

Quote from Obama/McCain debates.

“Obama: Well, I think it [healthcare] should be a right for every American”

So you disagree with Obama on this?
[/quote]
absolutely I think you are toying with semantics , Obama is entitled to see things how ever he likes , after all he is president[/quote]

bump

[pittbulll]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:

Quote from Obama/McCain debates.

“Obama: Well, I think it [healthcare] should be a right for every American”

So you disagree with Obama on this?
[/quote]
absolutely I think you are toying with semantics , Obama is entitled to see things how ever he likes , after all he is president[/quote]

bump

[pittbulll]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:
. Do you agree with Obama, that healthcare is a right, alongside life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?[/quote]

Yes

Only because America is so wealthy. We need to reprioritize [/quote]

bump

[pittbulll]

Page 9 check it out

[storey420]

Nothing wrong with Obama thinking it should be a right, that’s an opinion. Now when it comes to how to actually structure and pay for said right…that’s when it’s time for the community organizer to step aside. Healthcare for everyone with healthcare in its current structure is nonsensical.

[H_factor]

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
But these are our rights because this is precisely what the founders said were our rights.[/quote]

No. These are our rights because they are our rights. The founders said the government, in America, will protect them.

It is like saying, “the Sun shines because we said it does”. Well, yes we created the word “shine” and gave it its meaning, but we didn’t make the Sun shine…

Over and over again they said we have a right to this stuff and we WILL protect these rights in our new government. It is the sole reason for creating government they said.

I’ve said as much as well.

And if you don’t think they are malleable look at education. The people (well government, but all the same thing) essentially MADE this a new right.

No, it is a government provided service that everyone has “equal” access to. Education isn’t a right. Some felt it was the duty of government to educate people, even though the people at the time knew quite a bit more history than the people of today, and they didn’t have google…

[quote]Of course they can do that. We could argue if they should or not all day long, but of course they CAN. Of course we have that ability. Why the hell wouldn’t we? Again, we did 200 years ago. Why couldn’t we take this away?

[/quote]

Of course you can take rights, doens’t mean they aren’t there… (I mean, hense the revolution, lol) You can legislate anything you want, you can call it a right all day, doesn’t mean it is one.

I call Ducks quackers… Does that mean they aren’t ducks anymore?[/quote]

This is all semantics. Essentially we forced education on people. Now how are you going to say we can’t do the same with health care? Governments MAKE sure you have equal access to education. Essentially it is required. I can’t legally

I can list all sorts of problems WITH doing this, and I definitely don’t think we should. But I don’t see how one can say we CAN’T. Why not? We could make red lollipops a right if we wanted to. Yes it will still “technically” be a good, but our rights are malleable. They can be whatever we deem them to be. Of course this is the case. It has to be the case. Governments are created by people and our rights are merely the things we the people have decided the government should protect.

If we wanted to create a new government where we said it was absolutely essential to us that everyone got a red lollipop every day and we made it AGAINST the law to keep anyone from getting one why couldn’t we? Much more beneficial to point out the reasons why health care shouldn’t be a right than to say “NO WE CAN’T CHANGE ANYTHING.”

Yes, we can change whatever we want. We have many times and will continue to. We have always had this power.