I'm not here to debate whether or not rights exist. I'm here to discuss what rights should be guaranteed/protected.
For me, I think the converse of free speech is the right not to listen. It's the only way to really make sure that free speech isn't abused. It's also a good counter to the Marxist criticism that "free speech is a bourgeois prejudice." I absolutely believe that freedom of speech should be protected, and I also believe that the freedom of not listening should also be protected.
Ummm..There really isn't a need for the right to not listen. It's really tough to weed out day dreamers and as in the case of republicans, just plain stupid people.
Well Republicans and other authorities implicitly believe that everyone should listen to THEM. That everyone should obey THEIR laws and THEIR cultural paradigms, so they don't really respect other people's right to silence.
Quote from: "zarus tathra"I'm not here to debate whether or not rights exist. I'm here to discuss what rights should be guaranteed/protected
Off the top of my head: Freedom of Thought. Speech. Assembly. Privacy. Due process. Equality under the law. Autonomy (//http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/personal_autonomy). Also, everything here (//http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/) is a good start.
Quote from: "zarus tathra"I'm here to discuss what rights should be guaranteed/protected.
For me, I think the converse of free speech is the right not to listen.
I have always viewed this as a debate, why because if useful debates occur they are generally called
discussions over said topic whether informal or formal. We still may not all agree on what should be protected as "rights."
I think that people should have the right to be able to word smith definitions of words to fit their topic as it would be very useful in many [s:33tecb24]debates[/s:33tecb24] discussions.
I have the right not to listen but let's discuss this. :rollin:
On a serious note though, I feel that people have the right to be heard whether the other party doesn't want to hear it. It doesn't mean they actually have to agree with it after hearing it.
You don't have the right to ignore me! Anyone not reading this...off to the slammer! :rollin:
The same rights that the US was founded on. I say that as a non-American.
I like the idea for one main reason: As I understand the American model, rights aren't considered to come from government, the government simply is supposed to uphold them. Period. It doesn't grant them, it doesn't take them away.
Obviously there were some flaws (most of them corrected *cough* slavery) but arguably they were a perversion of the founding principles that all men are created equal and have unalienable rights.
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"You don't have the right to ignore me! Anyone not reading this...off to the slammer! :rollin:
why do you have to bring in the ignore word. Let me pull my hammer and anvil out and see what I can do to
[blink:2z1saiq1]slammer[/blink:2z1saiq1] out of this situation.
The right to be heard? Do you realize how easily that could be abused?
Quote from: "zarus tathra"The right to be heard? Do you realize how easily that could be abused?
Most likely no more abused than the right not having to listen, silly ain't it. Why is it that all I can think of is how people of power would invoke the right not to listen as a personal "right." It isn't like our elected officials give up there constitutional rights just because they are holding a position of power. Didn't Saddam Husein do that when he was in power, not listen to his own people? Well, I would like to continue this discussion but I think it feels too much like a debate. Unless... well
Besides actually you already have the right not to listen or listen to whatever you want no need to go further with it. It was the point I was making that you come up with some weird shit but then you call out and say that my idea is bad because it could be abused? Well shit so could yours just to make sure that we are squared off on this [s:32v8yhwl]debate[/s:32v8yhwl] discussion.
Shelter. Even if it's just a fucking shack with a Franklin stove shelter should be a right. I would say food should be a right as well.
Everyone deserves the right to this, that and the other thing.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights covers the basics.
//http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#ap
I demand the right to fight for my right to party*.
*(right to party expressly implied.)
Well elected officials are implicitly infringing on other people's rights not to listen to them, so to be fair they should be forced to listen. Doesn't mean that common citizens should be forced to listen to each other.
The so-called right to not listen is pretty much self-enforced since you don't need to listen to anything any one says. You don't like someone's views, you can walk away, if he follows he's probably breaking some law already that deals with stalking or harassment.
Representatives, senators and politicians in general are not in such abundant supply that they have unlimited time to listen to each individual constituent. Are you somehow suggesting each politician ought to be available 24/7 and forced to listen to any and every rant any citizen might have? We already have a do nothing congress so think it over. Just how slow should the legislative process be to accomidate this?
Freedom from right-wingers.
Quote from: "Atheon"Freedom from right-wingers.
aka Canada (not exactly true, but that's how I like to see it)
Quote from: "zarus tathra"I'm not here to debate whether or not rights exist. I'm here to discuss what rights should be guaranteed/protected.
For me, I think the converse of free speech is the right not to listen. It's the only way to really make sure that free speech isn't abused. It's also a good counter to the Marxist criticism that "free speech is a bourgeois prejudice." I absolutely believe that freedom of speech should be protected, and I also believe that the freedom of not listening should also be protected.
Isn't "freedom to not listen" as you suggest it covered by freedom of thought?
My own view on the matter is that I would fight for the right of another person to voice their opinion, and I also fully reserve the right to think it's utterly stupid.
I think that 95% of these "rights" we're coming up with are dedicated to supporting "freedom of thought."
Freedom to move. Freedom to live wherever you damn want.
No visa.
QuoteYou've got rights, lots of rights. Sometimes I count them just to make me feel crazy... But right now you've got a piece of glass shoved in a major artery in your arm, right now you're bleeding to death. Right now I'm the only one person in the world who can get you to a hospital in time. -Batman
Quote from: "Atheon"Freedom from right-wingers.
Ooh! Does that mean we get to have freedom from leftists as well?
Quote from: "CloneKai"Freedom to move. Freedom to live wherever you damn want.
No visa.
That would be a demographic disaster. Borders are a good thing given the world we live in with conflicting cultures, different languages, different interests etc.
I would like all people to have the right to be free from military conscription unless their nation is invaded.
If you're in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany wants to exterminate your entire population, there's a point to conscription. If you want to conscript people to fight a discretionary war, eat shit and die.
I would like people to be free of conscription even
if their nation is invaded.
If your population isn't lining up to fight off invaders, maybe it's time for your government to be replaced by the invader's, because apparently the population has already decided it'd rather be controlled by them.
QuoteThat would be a demographic disaster. Borders are a good thing given the world we live in with conflicting cultures, different languages, different interests etc.
Aren't borders also a major
cause of conflicting cultures, different languages, different interests, etc?
Quote from: "Plu"I would like people to be free of conscription even if their nation is invaded.
If your population isn't lining up to fight off invaders, maybe it's time for your government to be replaced by the invader's, because apparently the population has already decided it'd rather be controlled by them.
Even if the people are happy with their current government and hate the invading government, there's a very high probability they won't line up to fight off invaders without being conscripted: it's a classic example of a "social trap."
A social trap is when short-term individual gains conflict with long-term social goals. In a population of millions, the contribution of any one person to defending the nation from invasion is trivial. An individual's best way to maximize his personal gain is by taking his family somewhere to lie low or flee the nation. The problem is that if every individual follows his best bet, the whole society loses.
So I see a point conscripting the Soviets to prevent the Nazis from exterminating the whole population (that was their ultimate plan), but I see no justification conscripting Americans to go fight in Vietnam for example.
Also, people talk about how the countries in Africa had their border drawn up without any regard for traditional tribal divisions, with the result being that tribes were divided and half and then "forced" to live in the same country as other ethnicities. What has not been proven, however, is that African countries that are racially homogeneous are actually BETTER than African countries that aren't. Because they aren't really noticeably better.
Look at Japan. They're racially homogeneous, and yet they're still really, really concerned about burakumin (//http://www.japanprobe.com/2009/05/03/burakumin-groups-angry-at-google-earth/), descendents of the "underclass" from the old feudal Japanese caste system. If people didn't have race to bitch about, they'd be tearing each other apart a billion other things.
Quote from: "Plu"Aren't borders also a major cause of conflicting cultures, different languages, different interests, etc?
No, actually they're the result. Remember Yugoslavia? They didn't get along so they became multiple countries. Human nature is tribal and messed up like that, but there's nothing we can do about it.