Frank wrote on Oct 5
th, 2023 at 7:28pm:
thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 5
th, 2023 at 11:39am:
freediver wrote on Oct 5
th, 2023 at 11:23am:
Quote:So the "subjective consciousness of many individuals" is an inalienable right, according to you.
No, that is not what I said.
Yet you - being fraudiver - don't have the nous or integrity to explain what you think the passage means, hence being a prize fraud, you are satisfied to rely on what you didn't/won't say.
Let's have another try - and see where the fraud takes us this time...:
(Rights are)
"... imaginary entities that exist only within the communication network linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals"What does that say, for YOU, re 'inalienable rights'?
And can you give an example of said "rights".
Think - if that is not too much to ask of you (
It is, ed.) - of how rights can be violated and by whom and on what ground?
Are we talking about individuals' differing opinions, and/or desires?
chimera has noted:
'Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement according to some legal system'.
The underlined is key - rights are not inherent/inalienable, but
exist by virtue of being established within a system of law. Quote:On what grounds can anyone deny or violate the freedom of thought and conscience?
At least you are an honest debater, unlike our prize fraud, fraudiver.
In my opinion, on the grounds of
collective security and wellbeing; "freedom values" ideology
worshipped by naturally self-interested individuals results in the richest country in the world tolerating half its population living paycheck to paycheck, the very definition of
chronic financial stress. Crippling political hyperpartisanship follows as sure as night follows day.
Quote:Where does the right to violate them can come from?
The desire for 'fairness', in human affairs.