Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
that article is idiotic, ace.
it's a second-rate rehash of the second-rate political fiction that is john locke's second treatise on government.
|
First calm down, count to ten or something, whatever works for ya. My post was to set a baseline, for my purpose, to first define terms. It is a nasty habit, but it stuck from my early days when I was on my high school debate team.
If the citation provided is idiotic, perhaps you can give me the insight of your superior knowledge and define the term and concept of a right.
Quote:
but despite, well, everything i kinda enjoy watching conservative reject element after element of the capitalist mode of production in the name of the capitalist mode of production process through second-rate "thinkers" like ayn rand....it's fascinating in the same way as is watching a car crash into a wall. and it'd be funny---you know, laugh out loud funny---were this kind of ultra-right lunacy not something that some (maybe) otherwise sensible people find compelling.
so if you don't think that access to safe potable water is something on the order of a basic citizenship right, why don't you stop drinking it or bathing in it or using your sewer system or flood control system until some more non-equitable rights-free form of conservative libertarian barbarism gets instituted?
|
The obvious next question, which you will ignore, but is presented because I can envision steam coming out of your ears as you read what I write, (and I did think you where done wasting your time with me, no, just kidding, I never thought that even-though you wrote it), as presented in a earlier post, how do you reconcile the right to property when the right to water conflicts? If I own, develop a water source, do you have an unrestricted right to it? Or, do you not believe a person has a right to private property?
Quote:
once right libertarian barbarism gets into power, though, you won't have anything to say.
because you'll have no rights.
because you will have given them away.
|
Dude, let's not forget:
What are you willing to do to defend your rights?
{added} Kidding around with Roach aside, I think people in a geographic area would have a claim to water resources in the area, meaning that water resource should not be unreasonably withheld, but that compensation should be given to those who put work and effort into developing water resources.