• eldavi@lemmy.mlEnglish
      0·
      1 month ago

      careful; continuing to espouse reality will get you ostracized and eventually banned on .world and nevermind that ignoring similar constructive criticism is the reason why democrats lost the election.

  • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    1 month ago

    Isn’t the idea of rights that they are endowed upon or imbued into each individual by some supernatural authority, like a god? I mean, aren’t rights metaphysical, in that they are not context dependent, and exist even outside of time and space itself? Like, the idea of inherent individual rights is that you can remove a person from any given time and place, move that individual to any other time and place, and their “rights” would follow with them, not unlike a soul.

    • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.netEnglish
      0·
      1 month ago

      unfortunately, those are dignities, not rights. rights are a legal contract between you and your governing body. rights are granted. dignities are the things that are intrinsically connected to your personhood, your humanity, or both.

      • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        1 month ago

        So if your governing body decides you don’t have rights, then you don’t have those rights.

        Edit: it seems like rights are only available to people who have enough power, money, and/or influence over the state to persuade the state to grant them the rights they desire.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          1 month ago

          That is generally how rights work, yes. But not how rights for people who believe in a humanist moral outlook think should work.

          • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.netEnglish
            1·
            1 month ago

            precisely. when we talk about who runs the government and how they should operate it, we are generally (i can’t speak for everyone) trying to navigate getting the rights the government grants us to align as perfectly as possible with the dignities we possess