Quote:In the U.S., there is capital punishment. I would say that pretty much eliminates all of one's "rights."In some States yes - But the US isn't seen as a role model by outside westerns - I'm sorry if you didn't know this
As much as I hate the EU, they have a very strong anti-death penalty stance precisely because the highest right of all (to live, and breathe) shouldn't be taken away unless someone acts in self-defense.Quote:It seems a meaningless fiction. What do the rights do for you? How does one distinguish between a universe in which such rights exist, and a universe in which they do not? It seems to be nothing at all, but empty words.It would be meaningless if rights served no purpose - Because they do, it's a useful fiction. I'm used to working with legal systems influenced by Roman law, so I support writing down laws instead of appealing to legal precedents. I'm influenced by legal positivism, so I'm of the opinion that the law should represent the general and will and be written/codified to be valid and acceptable - Whatever the constitution says justifies the laws made according to the constitution. Most European constitutions are rights-friendly, so that justifies rights-friendly laws - And I'm all for that. I don't think there's literally natural rights that you are born with, you are born merely with the instinct of survival (and even so much less skillful than other animals, humans are born incomplete compared to other wild species) - Rights are social constructs that, like language, make our living together much easier - That's it. Inalienability if it means that all citizens must possess X or Y right and not be able to lose it (only justified restrictions can be put in place) is very useful as a fiction - Don't you agree? Or do you prefer if constitutions just say that all rights can be taken away at anytime?
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you
