652
Ohio Republicans Say It's Their 'God Given Right' to Restrict Abortion Access
(www.rollingstone.com)
this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
652 points (98.5% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2919 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Rights aren't actually given out by anyone, you're born with them. They're inherent to your existence as a human being.
Sure, you're born with them, but only if you're born to the right parents, in the right place on a map, at the right time. They're not holy writ, not natural law- they are an expression of a social contract, whereby you get them by upholding and respecting them in others.
That not everybody has the same rights should be a bright signal that they aren't God-given, they're granted by people, and if they're not actively upheld and protected, they're just nice words somewhere that will mean nothing when someone violates them
The reason I'm going to the effort to argue that our rights arise in the social contract is not to pretend they don't exist, it is rather to point out that unless people participate in protecting and upholding them, they can be taken away. My concern with the 'they are God-given' crowd is that they seem to want people to be passive about rights, and that's how they can be taken away.
See my response to the other guy
Rights don't really exist in a meaningful way outside of like humans agreeing on them. They're not like mass that you can measure. If everyone decided "Blue eyed people don't have the right to own property" well then that's the world. Compare with if everyone said "Gravity on earth accelerates at 5 m/s^2"
Rights are agreements. They are aspirational. But they don't just automatically exist in any meaningful way.
That's not true. Just because they're immaterial doesn't mean they don't exist -- best practices in terms of social interaction aren't limited to humans, and most of what makes life what it is -- our thoughts, dreams, imaginations, even our religions -- are immaterial and unfalsifiable. Other species even have self-awareness and theory of mind, so you can't argue rights don't exist.
Your reasoning is a blatant bandwagon fallacy and therefore invalid. If everyone else in the world decided blue-eyed people didn't have rights, those blue-eyed people would still have them. You all simply decided to violate them collectively, and the revenge and war your actions would bear would be ones you rightfully deserve. Rights aren't about who can do what. They're about your existence on this earth and what it is you should prioritize and choose to fight. They are the spiritual essence of self-worth.
They exist regardless of whether other people agree to them or not. That's the whole point of rights.
You're clearly looking for a way to either dismiss rights or dismiss me, so let's make it easier for you: That's just lame ass authoritarian tripe you were told to convince you to submit to the lockdowns and other covid restrictions. You're one of those types. The type who watched everyone collectively ignore and reject respect for human rights and decided, "Well, if rights truly existed, how could we have gotten away with bullying everyone else to being put on house arrest for three years and all the other cruel shit we did to them?". And you're just an idiot blowhard for thinking that way.
Now prove my point by completely derailing the debate with meaningless pro-lockdown talking points, come on. 🙄
Please show your work proving that rights exist beyond things people agree to.
They're aspirational but they're also made up. They change based on culture and context. We can say people have a right to a fair trial, but that is created, not discovered.
You can say you have the right to do whatever but that's just something you said. It's not enforced by anything unless people agree. Rights are just customs and laws with better branding.
I have no idea why you're talking about the pandemic, either.
Says so pretty fucking explicitly in the founding document of your own nation.
But you're just some wack-ass authoritarian so what little can we really expect of you than to go full mask-off? Burn in hell, fascist
You think I'm a fascist? You clearly don't know me.
Furthermore! Just because it says something in an old document, that doesn't prove anything. Lots of old documents say lots of things. And additionally, the declaration of independence doesn't even have legal weight. It's not the constitution. And even furthermore, even if it did have legal weight, the important part would be the laws and their enforcement, not some nebulous axiomatic """rights"""*
Wait, do you think I'm anti-abortion or siding with the republicans here?