Before it is decided to limit someone else's Rights

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by DearthnVader, Aug 1, 2016.

  1. DearthnVader macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #1
    Democracy and liberty are often thought to be the same thing, but they are not.

    Democracy means that people ought to be able to vote for public officials in fair elections, and make most political decisions by majority rule.
    Liberty, on the other hand, means that even in a democracy, individuals have rights that no majority should be able to take away.

    The rights that the Constitution's framers wanted to protect from government abuse were referred to in the Declaration of Independence as "unalienable rights." They were also called "natural" rights, and to James Madison, they were "the great rights of mankind." Although it is commonly thought that we are entitled to free speech because the First Amendment gives it to us, this country's original citizens believed that as human beings, they were entitled to free speech, and they invented the First Amendment in order to protect it. The entire Bill of Rights was created to protect rights the original citizens believed were naturally theirs.

    https://www.aclu.org/bill-rights-brief-history
     
  2. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #2
    but we limit rights as the majority sees fit.
     
  3. DearthnVader thread starter macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #3
    In a small republic, where simple majority rule prevailed, nothing would stop this mass from taking away the rights or the property of the minority.
     
  4. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
  5. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #5
    no need, could very well be equal rights thread.
     
  6. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
  7. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #7
    I suspect besides an educational post, that the OP has some specific examples you'd like to mention? :)

    For example I don't believe the Fore Father's would call gun ownership an unalienable right given by God, although they thought it was important that government could not confiscate our guns, since we had just won a revolution, but they also never imagined where that would lead us today. This is not an anti-gun post, nor will I get mired in another gun debate in this thread. Just posting an observation. :)
     
  8. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #8
    While there may be limitations on rights to minimize their abuse, to the extent that others are harmed misuse of those natural rights, those limits are recognized and (usually) generally accepted.

    Where we get stuck is when a majority, or vocal minority, seeks to limit those rights to satisfy their own goals or desires. It's a challenge across the spectrum to not try to impose your view of acceptable restrictions on others. Sometimes it's a matter of perspective or competing priorities, but too often it is just personal opinion putting on airs.

    I'll be the first to admit that I have done this in the past. I try not to, but acknowledge that I may even do it again, and am happy to be called out when I do.
     
  9. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #9
    Read that wrong
     
  10. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #10
    what in the world did you read?!? :eek::eek: ;)
     
  11. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #11
    I read it as "Do you have rights?"
     
  12. DearthnVader thread starter macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #12
    It's not for us , or SCOTUS, to infer what the framers would have foreseen. Only what they wrote:

    I think the only thing up for debate is whether "Arms" means "Firearms" or "Armaments".

    The point of this thread is these are natural or God given Rights, not Rights handed down by Government, thus they can not be taken away by Government. While we can agree there are some reasonable limitations on Rights, one can't yell fire in a crowded theater, unless there is a fire. One can't expect to take a gun to jail, if one is under arrest. and so forth.

    This thread doesn't just apply to guns, what about Extraordinary rendition, being held without charge, trial, legal representation, etc.
     
  13. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #13
    Is"guns" what you had in mind when you created this thread?
    Gun ownership is not a inalienable or God given right. Example of a universal right- no citizen should not be discriminated against based on their race, gender, religion or even ... sexual orientation, a recent idea. :) Very basic ideas. However, we have rights of which many are subject to regulation. I assume you are for drivers licenses, same for guns, subject to regulation. A mentally ill or emotionally unstable citizen has no business carrying a gun as part of a regular routine.
     
  14. DearthnVader thread starter macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #14
    So the Right of self defense, and the Right to participate in the defense of one's Nation is not a Natural or God given Right?

    What other Rights in the Bill of Rights are not Natural Rights?


    If someone is a danger to themselves or others they should be institutionalized until they are no longer a danger. Denying someone the right of self defense because they have had mental issues in the past leaves them at the mercy of those who would seek to do them harm.
     
  15. bent christian Suspended

    bent christian

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2015
    #15
    Both are natural rights. There is, quite literally, nothing "natural" (or magical) about a firearm, except for the elements it is made out of.
     
  16. DearthnVader thread starter macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #16
    So might makes right, who ever is stronger or more powerful by nature wins. Absolutely absurd, the framers understood the need for "Arms" in defense.
     
  17. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #17
    oh...it is a gun thread. damn. I'm fairly sure (to OP topic), that our constitutional rights are (mostly) well-defined, and many people equate "rights" to "privileges" these days...
     
  18. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #18
    Not sure why we ended up making this a firearms thread. There are a couple of posters here that started the path and others seem to have followed.

    My first instinct was to see this as a discussion on the limits of the press and speech, as also the right to privacy (or security in our effects and papers).

    While each of us is endowed with, among other inalienable rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, these are only ideals that have no force of law. Those are only the natural state of man and must be protected from encroachment by any society, including a Democracy. Those protections are what secure our Liberty.

    As to the sacrifices Liberty must make at the altar of Democracy, I would argue that a limitation far greater than strict scrutiny is necessary. Under the current standard, too many Liberties have been rendered forfeit in the name of preserving Democracy. There are many who consider the trade fair, that the preservation of Democracy must be our highest aim - that without the light on a hill, hope for government of the people to endure begins to fade. I hold that Liberty must be the prime virtue, that even Democracy may be sacrificed if unable to her strict demands.

    Allowance of "Constitution-free" zones near borders is too great at 40 miles, let alone 100 miles. Usage of biometric data to unlock personal devices may prove access but should never be taken as evidence of ownership or control.

    A tragedy
     
  19. tgara macrumors 6502a

    tgara

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Location:
    Somewhere in the Delta Quadrant
    #19
    Natural (or God given) rights are mentioned in the Declaration of Independence (... we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" -- happiness meaning self worth and dignity by involvement in civic activities or education in the 18th century).

    The Framers felt that unalienable rights were rights that the government can never take away from you because they were given by God and not bestowed by the government. One argument some people make relative to guns is that they are used to secure life and liberty, etc., which are unalienable natural rights mentioned in the Declaration. Without a means to secure the natural rights, those natural rights could be abused or taken away by the government. This is partly why the second amendment is mentioned second and not 8th or 10th.
     
  20. DearthnVader thread starter macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #20
    Every thread about Rights seems to become a Gun thread, because it seems to be the only Right that a lot of people think they can take from others, while leaving it to those they chose to have it.
     
  21. bent christian Suspended

    bent christian

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2015
    #21
    Sure. Self-defense is a natural right. Owning a fire arm is not. There is nothing natural about a firearm (except for the elements is is comprised of). You will not find one anywhere existing in nature. You won't find any other species using a firearms for these reasons. This right to own a firearm is not handed down by any god. It is granted by government, and is subject to regulation. The natural law argument is nonsense.
     
  22. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #22
    Gun ownership is a natural right conferred by God via the process of evolution upon his ultimate apex predator, the hairless apes called homo sapiens.
     
  23. bent christian Suspended

    bent christian

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2015
    #23
    This is not true, either. Less powerful animals routinely surprise us with their cunning and ability to fend off much larger predators in nature.
     
  24. DearthnVader thread starter macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #24
    I believe they do have the force of law, per the 9th Amendment.

    --- Post Merged, Aug 1, 2016 ---
    Ever been in a fist fight with someone that outweighs you by 100 lbs. ?
     
  25. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #25
    While the 9th reserves additional protections to the people by serving as a catch-all, the concepts of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness are just that. As concepts they are goals, the achievement of which must be accomplished through defined law. There is no specific right to liberty - but there a right to not self-incriminate, protection for your papers and effects, against cruel and unusual punishment, etc.

    The danger in assuming otherwise opens the floodgates - of your pursuit of happiness runs contrary to mine, what limitation justifies placing your goal (or method) first? That is where the Constitution seeks to resolve matters in fairness, with assistance through an approved legal and social framework.
     

Share This Page