Rights vs Privileges 1/5

[vidfreak56]

Yes a persons power is what makes him or her desire to use it, hence they desire a world where they can use it freely. This is where your concept of a right comes into play. By inspiring others to desire "rights", theyll feel more entitled to protect it. Its no different from what muslim extremists do when they think that allah wills them to kill. Rights and god simply enable men and women to behave immorally and have an excuse to do so.

[vidfreak56]

And I realize that you have your own definitions, so if you mean that your thoughts are "yours" in the sense that they come from you and may be "unique" (although thats arguable), then yes, you can say your thoughts are yours. You do not own them though (in the sense that they exclusively belong to you and cant or shouldnt be thought by anyone else). No one had to say that their thought belonged to them until the concept of intellectual property was created.

[malcolmxxxtdevils]

No.my thoughts are mine....It is my right to have these thoughts..100% spot on.

[vidfreak56]

@malcolmxxxtdevils What makes you think you have a right to your thoughts? Objectively prove to me that you do. And when you cant youll realize that you merely desire to have a "right" to these thoughts. Just because you can think, doesnt mean you have a right to think. I can take your ability to think away (labotomy), so you cant think as freely as you do now. Where are your rights then? "100% spot on" LOL self-validation is easy. Try thinking about what you say.

[malcolmxxxtdevils]

@vidfreak56 Thats your thoughts on the matter..Your mind..That belongs to you..That is your right to think that way :)

[vidfreak56]

@malcolmxxxtdevils Ah so if all else fails, repeat indoctrination and im supposed to just fall in line? One sentence thoughts clearly proves you dont care to think about things. Its only my mind because I desire it to be. Your doing what is called projection. YOU DESIRE MY MIND TO BELONG TO ME so you include that belief in converstation. Its my right to think? LOL thats mans way of realizing that thought isnt a threat, just as long as you dont act. LOLOLOLOLOLOL

[malcolmxxxtdevils]

@vidfreak56 no.im simply saying that i believe if you want to think that way then so what?I have stated what i have wanted to state.Thats it as far as i am concerned...By the way dont you are not allowed on my land!LOL

[vidfreak56]

@malcolmxxxtdevils LOL you better have the power to back that up! Ill come onto anyones land if I want to. The fact that they believe it means only that they have to protect it. If you cant protect it, then you dont get it, simple as that. Life is about who has the power, not who has a right.

[malcolmxxxtdevils]

@vidfreak56 Been good chatting with you..Yes the Power..haha.

[vidfreak56]

@malcolmxxxtdevils This is an example of a privilege. You are acting as an authority on what my rights are by telling me what my rights are. You project that onto me, so therefore you grant me those rights by extension. I dont have to worry about you taking my "right" to think (which is my desire only), since you extend me the courtesty of doing so freely. I do so in return only if you dont pose a threat to me with your thoughts. Now try and answer me in more than one sentence plz.

[vidfreak56]

Im not the one with the illusion here. I am looking at the world from an objective point of view, not a personal or subjective one. You arent born with rights, and you cant just develop them. They are vestigial desires left over from childhood. Man wants to entitle himself to whatever he wants, as he did when he was a child, so he invents rights to elevate himself in the natural world to something that exists above nature. Man is an animal, and subject to animal laws.

[vidfreak56]

Sorry you dont have rights...regardless what this guy says. DONT LISTEN TO BRAINWASHERS LIKE THIS GUY! YOU DONT HAVE A RIGHTS...PERIOD. The proof of this is that if I take your life from you, then I took your so called right to life away from you. You dont still have that right, as you had no inherent power within you to maintain that right (a right is a guarentee) incident to me. You never had it to begin with. I merely took the illusion of that right away from you.

[malcolmxxxtdevils]

@vidfreak56 I disagree..If i own land and you take my land away from me then it is still my land.Its just that you have taken it or stole it.. As regards with my life it is mine,no matter what you do with my life it is MINE.IF you take my life then you have stolen it..Its still not yours.. illusion you say?..

[vidfreak56]

@malcolmxxxtdevils Wow. Thats 100% wrong. If I take "your land" i havent stolen anything, but rather taken your illusion that it was yours. How could I take it if it were yours?? Ownership is an illusion. Its not real. You just want it to be. You could say I take what you believe to be yours, but thats just a belief and not fact. Objectively you cant prove you own anything, including your life. If I can take it, then its a privilege not a right.

[malcolmxxxtdevils]

@vidfreak56 No you are 100% wrong.. Thats just your translation OR (ILLUSION) of the matter...BUT THATS YOUR BELIEF AND THAT BELONGS TO YOU...

[vidfreak56]

@malcolmxxxtdevils LOL its not my belief its the truth. You dont have a right to life, or liberty. The only thing you have a "right" to is to fight for what you believe in. This is what we are doing here. If you need some form of power to keep others at bay then you arent entitled to what you have. A privilege is the closest thing youll come to a real right. A social privilege is what you have if you get to live not a natural right.

[malcolmxxxtdevils]

@vidfreak56 If you believe that is the truth then you should be allowed to have that right..LOL..

[vidfreak56]

@malcolmxxxtdevils But that is a simple matter of fighting for a belief. We are talking. That means the communication is objective not subjective. If it were subjective then wed be talking at eachother and not to eachother. Objectively, therefore, I have a "right" to fight for my belief. However I dont say that my belief is my right (subjective POV). And "should be allowed" is a privilege as an authority dictates what I "should" have.

[malcolmxxxtdevils]

@vidfreak56 Well i am saying that what i believe is my right...It is personal..It is a fire....It does not belong to anyone else except me..I own it.... 100%

[vidfreak56]

@malcolmxxxtdevils You think it...you dont own it. The proof is that many others can take your belief and copy it. That doesnt mean they have to pay you for it. LOL it just comes from you. IF... you have a right to life, then you also have a right to violate others rights to get it. Its an absurd and bankrupt ideology. Man is an animal. If man has the right to live, then so does any other animal, and man then violates animals rights. What makes man so special? God? Hah!

[vidfreak56]

@malcolmxxxtdevils What youre saying malcom is that you believe that your belief is your right. Thats all. It may be personal, but only in the fact that it comes from you, not that it belongs to you. 100% delusion.

[vidfreak56]

@malcolmxxxtdevils Also here im talking about social rights (privileges) not natural rights. This guy is talking about social rights as a means to inspire in a person a desire to entitle themselves to things. The more who do will feel the need to protect those desires (or beliefs). Dont confuse this process with a right, however, because its not. A right is something you have objectively. Life, liberty and property arent things we all JUST have. They are granted by us all.

[LawRival]

Camera man wake up. If you dont know how to operate the camera let me know i'll do it for free.

[MoneyWarturz]

1 video of 5

[longfootbuddy]

suppose your land is surrounded by others land, dont you have a right to cross theyr land to get to and from your land?...if not your imprisoned

[mrdivot22]

@longfootbuddy I don't believe a tract of land of any size can be sold if there is no access, public or private. There must be an easement whether from an adjoining property or to a street. If you have no access, you certainly couldn't develop it.

Unless you bought it hoping a developer would turn the area into something else, there wouldn't be much point in owning it.

[almsfsdjgx]

@mrdivot22 I'd say it's all about your ability to make an agreement with those around you.

Love thy neighbor? :D

[Alero02004]

@longfootbuddy. I necessarily true, I don't know much on the subject, but what I do know is that the land (speaking owned property) would have to provide ingress and regress (entrance and exit), to and from. You do not have the right to cross privet property without consent from the owner. Although, the owner that sold the property would have to provide ingress and regress to the farther part (your property). My father taught me that (A land owner.)

[Alero02004]

@longfootbuddy. @longfootbuddy. I necessarily true, I don't know much on the subject, but what I do know is that the land (speaking owned property) would have to provide ingress and regress (entrance and exit), to and from. You do not have the right to cross privet property without consent from the owner. Although, the owner that sold the property would have to provide ingress and regress to the farther part (your property). My father taught me that (A land owner.)

[Alero02004]

@longfootbuddy I necessarily true, I don't know much on the subject, but what I do know is that the land (speaking owned property) would have to provide ingress and regress (entrance and exit), to and from. You do not have the right to cross privet property without consent from the owner. Although, the owner that sold the property would have to provide ingress and regress to the farther part (your property). My father taught me that (A land owner.)

[malcolmxxxtdevils]

@longfootbuddy In Australia we have a thing called "a right of way" that means you are allowed to use a designated track of others properties ONLY to gain access to your own property.It is a right with conditions..

[longfootbuddy]

@malcolmxxxtdevils yeah, mrdivot22 pointed that out, and i then i recalled hearing about it

[VerifiedNews]

A right is something you have power of demand over. Or ownership. YOU OWN a right, a privelege is granted to you.

[helltrackrider]

I like Badnarik...

[cmoleon]

a right attributed to your person is that of a legal fiction, not really your own - see definition of 'person'. so even this definition of 'right' seems to be an attempt to rob you of your freedom, and to remove the fundamental difference between rights and privileges.

[conspiracy777]

This is where the weapons permit falls flat on it's face. Our RIGHT to bear arms is not a right granted by the state. It is inherent. Registration of our guns is also an infringement.

Shall not be infringed, is just that ... SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED! It doesn't say. Shall not be infringed as long as they comply with the proper paper work and pass a test and aren't on the no fly list and ...

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!

[spiritprofessor]

I am right back at a time where I will comply with the government on a fraudulant drivers license or I will not be enslaved anymore, it's major choice for me. If I have shit in one hand and love in the other, which one assists me understanding rights and privileges?

Love unto all!

[JohnnyUtah256]

Anything granted by the government can be taken away. The only rights we have are the ones we defend and refuse to surrender.

[almsfsdjgx]

@JohnnyUtah256 Absolutely. Pension is a privilege, and when people that have worked hard their entire life and paid into the pension plan suddenly get the notice 'Your pension is now 50% lower' they protest and say 'Hey, that's my right'. No, it's not - it's a privilege. And privileges can and do get taken away at any moment for any reason or no reason whatsoever.

[mjt1517]

@JohnnyUtah256 Read the Declaration of Independence. The American concept of rights is that they do not originate in the government. Therefore, they are inalienable.

[MrMichuzz]

i love this man

[peepnklown]

Michael Badnarik's book is a must read and his class is a must own on DVD.

[chetansingh2006]

the fundamental problem in america is they dont realise that the constution is being tampered with thanxs to president andrew jackson who made president a virtual dictator and here thomas Jaffersonian principles need to be restored at all cost. needs to be