Groups, Individuals, and the Definitions of Rights and Equality - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#14913479
One Degree wrote:How so? If a country of men and women jointly decide women should not vote, then should they be punished?

This sounds like another drunken fantasy …

Zam :cheers:
#14913690
Godstud wrote:A government is a GROUP. :knife: The majority is also a group.

Human rights are granted by society. Society is a large group. The government's a group that does this.

Democracy is a lot more complicated than this.
Nine out of ten participants supports a gang-bang. Only the "victim" is opposed.
This is an important principle for criticizing this kind of "majority gets whatever it wants."

For this reason, there are certain rights that must be extended to individuals, and others to groups, if you are to have a meaningful democracy, which we currently don't.

Also, giving women (or men) the vote is only meaningful if they have a good grasp on the political and social implications of the decisions that they vote on. We don't have that. We have ignorant TV-watchers who are tricked into buying useless crap, and voting for worse-than-useless gameshow hosts like Justin Trudeau, Obama, and Macron.
#14914263
One Degree wrote:That is just liberal nonsense. The only rights you have come from a government. Yes, you are SOL if the majority says you are. Just because someone says they have inalienable rights doesn’t mean they do. If you can’t protect them, you don’t have them. There are no basic human rights except in your imagination.


You're missing the point, the metaphysics of rights is irrelevant. The point is that people who violate the sovereignty and self determination of the individual shouldn't expect the world to respect their sovereignty and self determination.
#14914383
Sivad wrote:You're missing the point, the metaphysics of rights is irrelevant. The point is that people who violate the sovereignty and self determination of the individual shouldn't expect the world to respect their sovereignty and self determination.


There is no reason to have a government other than to determine who will have their sovereignty and self determination limited. That is why you have jails, mental institutions, and losing parties.
#14914509
Sivad wrote:The point is that people who violate the sovereignty and self determination of the individual shouldn't expect the world to respect their sovereignty and self determination.

Quite right - and the basis for criminal punishment.

One Degree wrote: Just because someone says they have inalienable rights doesn’t mean they do.

Which is why we have a constitution, to insure those rights are respected. It's not a perfect system, but we like it.

Zam :D

Doesn't he have billions in Truth social (you pos[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

The "Russian empire" story line is inve[…]

I (still) have a dream

Even with those millions though. I will not be ab[…]

Based on what? On simple economics. and in t[…]