propossal: that if prempting a right is valid than that right doesn't exist

Discussion in 'Formal debates' started by pjdude1219, Jul 23, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,194
    If a right can be preempted it doesn't exist. anyone want to take the side that it does.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,226
    I'm not entirely sure I understand what you mean by a right "existing." I think everyone would agree that rights are abstract concepts. Their "existence" seems to be dependent on whether or not anyone recognizes them.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. CheskiChips Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,538
    It's to difficult to argue. Often 'rights' that come up in the discussion are those of state rights and jurisdiction. The problem is often rights are infringed upon by upholding a law of equal stature...so the idea that a 'right' can be preempted is heavily dependent on the circumstance.

    To have a proper discussion on the topic, an agreement of underlying constitutional principals has to be reached. In other words; a prioritization of civil rights to be upheld has to be agreed upon. This discussion tends to be the subject of debate in Supreme Court Rulings, which recent rulings tend to support that state rights preempt federal rights more often than not. Though in seemingly contrary case rulings, federal jurisdiction has been seen to preempt state law.

    A series of rights that doesn't have conditional supersedence of individual rights to its self is the ideal. The Supreme Court has yet to accomplish this lofty goal.

    In short; I'm not sure it's a debatable topic. But if you still believe it's debatable. I take the stance that in the American court system rights that can be preempted are in fact rights.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    interesting
    i have a right to life
    anyone wanna tell me why i dont?
    will we be arguing the merits and demerits of capital punishment?
    are rights are conditional rather that fundamental?
     
  8. mike47 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,117
    The preempt business is only used by the strong ones who think life is a jungle whereas the big fish eat the small fish .
     
  9. CheskiChips Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,538
    Rephrase this entire statement with punctuation and proper grammar to be taken seriously.

    That's not true at all...when government agencies come into conflict...or when laws come into conflict one has to have eminence over the other. When there's no clear precident a court has to decide, because, if no law can preempt the other...then you have no course of action!
     
  10. just me Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    300
    yes.
    actually it does because even in the instance of prevention of the acting of the right the feeling of entitlement may remain.
     
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,675
    This thread is 11 years old. But you go, girl.
     
  12. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,672
    So was the original poster, probably. He knows better by now.
    What feelings to do with the exercise of rights?
    Do you really want to explore the dark alleys of what-all some people feel entitled to?
     
  13. just me Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    300
    the feeling of entitlement.
    and yes.
     
  14. just me Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    300
    thank you.
     
  15. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,964
    I've heard stories of coal miners defending their right to strike by taking to the woods with rifles and shooting at the goons/thugs/pinkertons the mine owners hired to beat up the strikers.
     
  16. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,672
    Again, what has a feeling to do with rights?
     
  17. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,023
    The needs of the many, out weigh the needs of the few....
     
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,023
    That of course also applies to "rights"
     
  19. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,672
    If they were defending a right to strike, it was enshrined in law. Before that, they had to fight the bosses, the goons and the government to get collective bargaining legislation passed, in order to have that right.
    Rights is a term used in law - whether secular or canon.
    Before the civil war, slave-owners had the right to beat, starve, rape and otherwise abuse his property, and a slave had no right to anything at all: if he ran away, he could be captured and returned, quite legally, to his master. Even if he felt entitled to freedom, he didn't have the right to get it.
    It's a social convention that has meaning only by consent of authority. Any other use is delusion or wishful thinking.
     
  20. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,232
    this is not about law
    this is about philosophy

    the law comes after the right has been accepted by a group and then acted upon to validate

    the concept of the existence of a right to the self perceiving it is a perception of the inner mind
    conceiving the outer world

    it is a little bit troll-esque toward the merchant of Venice

    err-go ...
    do humans have a right to oxygen even if they have a right to life ?
    (you have no right to MY oxygen and you didnt bring your own, but i accept your right to life which you may freely have)

    the right is not a right to physical things
    the right is the minds ability to perceive the aspect of the self having a need dependent on the outside physical world and more importantly that process of existence connecting implicitly to other peoples will
    the battle of wills in a premise of the self having a right to refuse all outside things
    water food oxygen people thoughts culture etc ...
     
  21. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,678
    Please read the rules of the Formal Debates forum before posting in it. Proposal threads are not for debating the topic.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page