Ayn Rand - Collectivized Rights

The U.S. Constitution was designed to protect individual rights, but what about collectivized rights? http://www.LibertyPen.com

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• social
• relationships
• moral
• code
• goals
• society
• principles
• nature
• survival
• reality
• self-destruction
• leader
• gang
• dictator
• force
• objectivism
• collectivism
• socialism
• brute
• destroy
• individual
• mob
• group
• free
• liberty
• members
• choice
• contract
• agreement
• association
• trade
• partnerships
• labor
• unions
• political
• parties
• agency
• doctrine
• Constitution
• libertarian
• conservative

[jmurphy914]

Brilliant!

[maskedphrogg]

@quakey987

You've lost most of this audience.

Show the logical connections necessary to support your seemingly irrational statement that Ayn Rand would support euthanasia. Perhaps you simply do not understand the term and that leads to your misuse of it here.

Euthanasia is the active participation in causing another's death. Merely standing by and letting Nature take it's course is categorically not euthanasia. Neither is stopping the thief taking one's own life a form of euthanasia.

[razoorsharp]

@Felhaven not entirely, because government assumes power of that agreement and forces it on people who did not agree with with others agreeth among themselves.

Your neighbour 2 and 3 doors down decide to build a playpark in YOUR backyard, you were not asked anything and if you did it was majority rule so you lose your property.. thats how government works. otherwise it's individual cooperation

[SomethingSea1]

@Felhaven

"that is not a code of conduct."

I see that you're not flexible to personification for purposes of analogy. Ok then.

The rest of what you say I don't see the relevance of. My basic point: The State bring people towards chaos, not away from it. We rely on The State in a similar way that Christians rely on the Bible. It's cute, but deadly.

[Felhaven]

@SomethingSea1 that is not a code of conduct. do not assult a person. do not take when is not yours. do not harm anothers property. these are codes of conduct. And that is all they are untill you form a organization whos goal is to prevent others from violating those codes. At that point they are rights, protected by collectivly granted permission to use force against those who violate those rights.

[SomethingSea1]

@Felhaven

"So you refer to rights as specific actions one can take when not limited by an opposing force?"

I guess so.

"do you still posses that right when limited?"

That's an interesting way of putting it. I don't think in terms of rights (I think they're bull), but no, at that point not. And, at this point, conflict ensues. Depending on the method of resolution, you might end up with talking, violence, or something similar.

[Felhaven]

@SomethingSea1 So you refer to rights as specific actions one can take when not limited by an opposing force? do you still posses that right when limited? and how can you tell which rights you have when yours may interfere with another persons?