You can't violate the imaginary
"You and I don't have any rights."
This statement is often followed by a list of ways political government violates our rights, "proving" we have no rights. But if we have no rights, how can government violate them?
The "We have no rights" claim is a circular argument just like the "Rights don't exist" claim. They both just lead back around to absurdities.
Every human on the planet has equal and identical rights. And once humans leave Earth their rights will go with them wherever they end up.
Will those rights be violated by someone? Guaranteed! So?
If I tie you up so you can't use your arms and then claim that since you can't use your arms you have no arms, is anyone going to buy that argument? Doubtful. That some make it nearly impossible to exercise your rights doesn't mean those rights don't exist-- they are just being violated.
Now, I could chop off your arms and claim you have no arms-- and I think you would agree I have a point, but arms are material while rights are immaterial. The only way to "remove" your rights is to kill you. And if you have no rights, where's the problem with that?
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com.
I hope I add something you find valuable enough to support. If so... Donations and subscriptions are always appreciated!
Find me on Patreon
Personally, I lean more to the side of "unlimited rights," i.e. I have the right to do anything I want, but if I do something that pisses you off, I believe you have the right to kill me.
I like to use this argument against those who claim that we have no rights for one specific reason: if we have no rights, then what gives anyone the right to tell other people what to do? Curiously, this is when I start hearing arguments for a two-tiered society and against social mobility, thus revealing my opponent's true colours.
Yeah, if humans have no rights, no one can have the "right to rule" so we are back to "Leave me to live as I want".