-
My[Confined]Space
Better Than Bread
Movies Coming Soon- Star Trek Books
- “Star Trek: Voyager: 16 Seven Of Nine” Review by Deepspacespines.com
- Nana Visitor Joins Us to Talk About Her New Book – Star Trek: Open a Channel: A Woman’s Trek!
- Out Today: “Star Trek #26”
- Star Trek Strange New Worlds Asylum Book Review
- John Jackson Miller Books Ranked!
- “Star Trek: The Next Generation: Headlong Flight” Review by Lessaccurategrandmother.blogspot.com
- Jumping into Adventure with “Into the Void”
- Happy 2024 Birthday to Jim Johnson!
- “Star Trek: Strange New Worlds: Asylum” Review by Trek.fm
- Beadle & Grimm Interview With StarTrekBookClub.com
- Movie Related Products
- “Deadpool & Wolverine” Review
- Kevin Smith Is Getting Closer and Closer to Dogma 2
- “The Garfield Movie” Review
- Disney Said to be Considering a Surprising Replacement for Bob Iger: EA CEO Andrew Wilson – IGN
- Amazon Is Shutting Down Freevee, Its Ad-Supported Video Streamer
- “Breathe” Review
- “Transformers One” Review
- Captain America: Brave New World | Official Trailer
- Marvel Studios’ Thunderbolts* | D23 Brazil Special Look | In Theaters May 2, 2025
- Mattel apologizes after mistakenly printing porn site on ‘Wicked’ movie dolls packaging | CNN Business
- Music Video DB
More specifically, having “the right to X” means that X cannot be taken away from you without one hell of a good reason (eg., you plan to use X to kill people), not that the government must give you a ton of X without you having to move a finger for it.
Semantics.
No rights are inherent.
You have whatever “rights” your particular society, culture or government allow you to have. (or “grants” you)
Do governments have a right to collect taxes for instance…?
It may not be an exclusive right, but if you want to call yourself a citizen, then you are giving them that right.
Do homosexuals have the right to marry? This is an exclusive right that hasn’t been granted until very recently.
The idea of rights does not exist in a vacuum.
Humans are a social animal with very complex social systems.
To speak about rights, without looking at the whole picture (like how rights affect society in the spectrum from anarchy to order) is grossly overly simplifying the issue.
You described entitlements which far too many confuse with rights. As human beings we are born possessing rights, the government may violate those rights, limit our ability to exercise those rights, but those inherent rights are still possessed by us. The US Constitution acknowledges that we posses rights independent of whether the Government approves of those rights or how we exercise those rights. Too many in and out of government are way too eager to violate the rights of those they do not agree with; the first step is to claim (falsely) that rights are granted by the Government.
What is a right that nobody acknowledges?
Humans aren’t born “possessing rights”.
That’s claptrap.
Whatever rights you have are entirely dependent on whatever society, culture, country, government you were born under….or currently live in.
Assuming that the “rights” outlined in your Constitution are universal, or even “self evident” is a very shuttered ethnocentric view.
They are different in every society or culture around the world, and certainly vary across history.
They haven’t even been consistent over your own history.
And who wrote that document that lays out your “rights” anyway….?
Your first government, wasn’t it….?
And they certainly didn’t intend them to be applicable to all members of society (the poor, women, and blacks had to wait more than a century before those “rights” were extended to them.
Your constitution is entirely a political document.
You can call them rights, entitlements, freedoms, laws, morals, karma….anything you want.
Semantics.
Just language.
They only mean anything when they are put into law.
And even then, they are often “amended”….