Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Individualism versus Collectivism: The "Right to Life"

guthmund · 05-25-2005, 06:22 AM

26/Male
Lifelong American resident
Non-practicing Agnostic
Centrist with Liberal leanings
#2

Humans have no inherent or natural rights. In fact, I believe that these so called rights, including the "right to life" are nothing more than civilized society agreeing to live and let live. An unspoken, but largely recognized agreement between the citizenry to agree to stay out of each others private lives.

I believe the burden of providing education and aid to the poor falls on the rich, but not because it's solely in their best interest (it is, but that's not why they should do it) rather I feel the rich have an obligation to fulfill to society at large. The very services (municipal, social services, etc...) they help fund provide the very stability and safety that the rich (and it's just a general term, everyone who has should give proportionately) thrive in. Without these services that keep civilization civilized and that keep society stable, those that have wouldn't have nearly as much. I don't believe the poor are 'entitled' to anything, nor do I believe we should bankrupt the rich to coddle the lax and lazy, but the cost of civilized society has to be paid. It should be paid by those who have benefitted the most from living in that civilized society.

05-25-2005, 06:22 AM	#5 (permalink)
guthmund big damn hero	26/Male Lifelong American resident Non-practicing Agnostic Centrist with Liberal leanings #2 Humans have no inherent or natural rights. In fact, I believe that these so called rights, including the "right to life" are nothing more than civilized society agreeing to live and let live. An unspoken, but largely recognized agreement between the citizenry to agree to stay out of each others private lives. I believe the burden of providing education and aid to the poor falls on the rich, but not because it's solely in their best interest (it is, but that's not why they should do it) rather I feel the rich have an obligation to fulfill to society at large. The very services (municipal, social services, etc...) they help fund provide the very stability and safety that the rich (and it's just a general term, everyone who has should give proportionately) thrive in. Without these services that keep civilization civilized and that keep society stable, those that have wouldn't have nearly as much. I don't believe the poor are 'entitled' to anything, nor do I believe we should bankrupt the rich to coddle the lax and lazy, but the cost of civilized society has to be paid. It should be paid by those who have benefitted the most from living in that civilized society. __________________ No signature. None. Seriously.