Where Do Our Rights Come From?

[phillip1882]

i once read this questionare that asked:

"what right does the second ammendment of the u.s. constitution grant?"

my responce was that, the second ammendment lists the right to bear arms but doesn't acutually grant the right.

the right to bear arms would exist even if there was no second ammendment.

of course that then begs the question, where exactly do our rights come from?

my argument is this: there are two types of rights. explicit and implicit.

our explicit rights come from the laws of logic aplied to a just society.

our implicit rights are derived from the explicit ones.

as a few examples...

if we desire a just society, then we have the explicit right not to commit murder.

from this explicit right, we have the implicit right to life, as well as the implicit right to self defence.

if we desire a just society, then we have the explicit right not to steal.

from this explicit right, we have the implicit right to property.

if we desire a just society, then we have the explicit right not to enslave.

from this right, we have the implicit right to liberty.

and so on.

[dduckwessel]

I thought that initially our rights were defined simply by moral values (don't kill, don't steal, don't lie, don't defraud) and everyone knew the rules...and even tho some broke them they fully expected to be punished if caught...

 

if someone breaks into your house you have the right to bear arms but that law (among so many others) took a wrong turn somewhere as often the innocent party is punished right along with the offender(s):

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123703&page=1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_(farmer)

[lawcat]

There are natural rights or birthrights and acquired rights. In law, rights come from customary human behavior. Therefore, it depends on society. In some societies, usually totalitarian, the society has total power over rights and then gives them away. In USA society, birthrights are inherent in life. The fact that you live, exist, gives you all the birthrights you can possibly imagine. Kinda like a lion or a shark has rights to do whatever the heck it pleases just by being alive. Examples are right to contract, right to talk, right to think, right to eat, right to raise children.

 

USA restricts some of those rights, and in some cases alienates them; as a combined effort of multiple people, USA with its enumerated powers is also alive and has rights within those powers, But the Bill of Rights restricts USA's power over certain individual rights--thus USA is a government of enumerated powers as well as limited powers.

Constitution, more specifically Bill of Rights, as an expressed will of organized group of people sometimes spells out which rights can not be alienated or infringed by the society's power over rights.

 

Acquired rights come from others. Examples of this are right to food stamps, right to enjoy possession of others. Acquired rights are highly regulated to prevent thievery and mob rule, since the society must stay organized.

 

Bottom line, some rights are birthrights and some are acquired from others. What those are is a matter of custom.

[Knothead]

i once read this questionare that asked:

"what right does the second ammendment of the u.s. constitution grant?"

my responce was that, the second ammendment lists the right to bear arms but doesn't acutually grant the right.

the right to bear arms would exist even if there was no second ammendment.

of course that then begs the question, where exactly do our rights come from?

my argument is this: there are two types of rights. explicit and implicit.

our explicit rights come from the laws of logic aplied to a just society.

our implicit rights are derived from the explicit ones.

as a few examples...

if we desire a just society, then we have the explicit right not to commit murder.

from this explicit right, we have the implicit right to life, as well as the implicit right to self defence.

if we desire a just society, then we have the explicit right not to steal.

from this explicit right, we have the implicit right to property.

if we desire a just society, then we have the explicit right not to enslave.

from this right, we have the implicit right to liberty.

and so on.

 

Society aside, if you boil it down even more, aren't we endowed rights simply because we exist? We have the right to choose to cooperate with society or to rebel. We have the right to be loving or hateful. We have the right to be moral or amoral.

So if I were to have to guess, I would say that our most basic rights come from Mother nature, Our Creator. Our life force. Our cosmic energy. Our God. Whatever term one chooses.

[CraigD]

USA restricts some of those [natural] rights, and in some cases alienates them; as a combined effort of multiple people, USA with its enumerated powers is also alive and has rights within those powers …

Are you saying that the US and/or other governments, are corporations, in the modern sense of the term?

 

I find that an interesting idea. Having only an informal education in an appreciation of law, I find the modern idea of corporations – non-humans who nonetheless (to borrow from a recent quote from US politician Mitt Romney) are people – fascinating, and more than a little perplexing, and would like to understand this idea for deeply and fundamentally.

 

Acquired rights come from others. Examples of this are right to food stamps, right to enjoy possession of others. Acquired rights are highly regulated to prevent thievery and mob rule, since the society must stay organized.

Another interesting idea, but I’ve not before heard the term “acquired rights” used in this way, can can’t find any reference to such a use via any simple internet search. Can you give an online reference? Or is this use your invention?

[lawcat]

No i do not have a reference, but law is full of references. You can google property rights for example, and you will find that it is a bundle of rights to use, possession, enjoyment, and transfer. When you rent, you acquire a stick or two of the bundle. In contracts, for exmaple collective bargaining in sports, teams can acquire rights to services of players. In Wills and Trusts, you can acquire rights to ascendant's possessions. And this does not even scratch the surface. Law is full of acquired rights. Right of access to court is an acquired right since courts are human invention and that right is given to people.

 

Since the OP asks about the origin, it only makes sense to make the classification based on within and without, inherent and acquired.

 

I did not mean to equate states with corporations. Corporations have no inherent powers or rights. Corporations are legal protective cloaks, States are not merely protective cloaks, they are actual sovereigns like people or tribes or nations.

[dduckwessel]

USA restricts some of those rights, and in some cases alienates them; as a combined effort of multiple people, USA with its enumerated powers is also alive and has rights within those powers, But the Bill of Rights restricts USA's power over certain individual rights--thus USA is a government of enumerated powers as well as limited powers.

Constitution, more specifically Bill of Rights, as an expressed will of organized group of people sometimes spells out which rights can not be alienated or infringed by the society's power over rights.

 

The inalienable rights the US and Canada used to enjoy are systematically being replaced with bureauocratic nonsense. We now have more laws to protect our rights but less freedom...a far cry from its beginnings:

http://blog.mises.org/2917/cicero-on-justice-law-and-liberty/

[Qfwfq]

where exactly do our rights come from?

From ourselves.

 

I don't get your argument. Because we desire something, we have the right not to act contrarily to it, and it's this which gives us the right to not be contrarily acted upon? Nah. Whether in the U. S. or elsewhere, our rights are what our societies grant us. Therefore the choice is up to the society we are in.

 

In some cases, including the U. S., a few fundamental ones are considered God-given and the fundamental code only prohibits authorities from removing them. In the U. S. case this was due to how the nation was born from English colony; King George was heavily trampling peoples "rights" until they rebelled against his authority in order to "regain" them. In actual fact they created them by winning the conflict but, when they decided to set them in parchment, they chose the "prohibition of abridgemet" line. This does not prevent other parties from abridging those same rights, so the people have less protection unless further law does so.

 

In some other nations, including here in Italy, fundamental code grants and guarantees the most fundamental rights; no source beyond the code itself is contemplated but the will of the people who elected the constituent assembly. This actually requires the nation to protect these rights, not only to "avoid abridging" them.

[phillip1882]

the reason i put "if we desire a just society.." in front is because, as knothead pointed out, morals can be relative from person to person. but for any individual that desires a just society, these are the rules and rights they are granted, which is the vast majority, to the best of my knowledge, although not everyone realizes it.

 

i agree you have some rights just by existing, such as the right to think, and to do with your own body as you see fit. but not every right can be derived from that. for example the anti theft right. one could argue "if i have the the right to my body and the right to think, do i have the right to take from someone else in order to save myself?"

which is a tricky predicament. whose right over sees the other, does the right to life have more value than the right to property? if they have the same value, as i would argue, then you cannot take without their permission, even to save yourself.