"the right to exist"

[FairyGirl]

Humans may debate whether they have the "right" to exist or not, but that right in no way extends to deciding it for every other living thing on the planet. Until we realize that, there will never be enough of anything for humans, consumed as we are with our greeds, hatreds, and fears. It's time for a new paradigm.

[imaz]

Humans may debate whether they have the "right" to exist or not, but that right in no way extends to deciding it for every other living thing on the planet. Until we realize that, there will never be enough of anything for humans, consumed as we are with our greeds, hatreds, and fears. It's time for a new paradigm.

Very, very, very well said.

Thank you.

[Jester]

We don't have any intrinsic right to exist, but I think that since we exist we completely have the right to fight to exist.  And that's going to interfere with some other people's right to fight to exist.

That's not really clear.  Your rights come from inside yourself, and you need to assert yourself in order to get the rights that you know inside you deserve, but other people are constantly trying to do the same thing with their rights, and sometimes they come into conflict.  The options there would be to either defeat the rights of another, compromise, or have your rights taken away.  Which you do would depend on your internal values, and the only one that seems intrinsically wrong would be to have your rights taken away, since it's something inside of you, so if you let another person take your rights it would defy the thing in human nature that makes us want rights.

So, I guess I think it's your duty to defend your rights, if they're rationally supportable of course, even if they conflict with somebody else's.

[lisagurl]

So, I guess I think it's your duty to defend your rights, if they're rationally supportable of course, even if they conflict with somebody else's.

However if you want help defending your rights you need to defend other people's rights. The prime word is fight for your and other people's rights. That is still no guarantee that you will be successful.

[heatherrose]

He damn sure is entitled to those self-same rights, and only when he was found guilty were those rights taken from him.

Be careful who's rights you might seek to take-away or limit.  Its not like your not on the top of other people's lists eh?

In saying that, I do not believe all are entitled to the privilege of being included in society.
The means to judge whether an individual is worthy of the privilege of association
is whether or not they attempt to infringe upon an others right to exist.

Meatbag enfringed on Angie's right to exist and his privilege
to associate with society was revoked, and rightly so.

And, any discussion of 'rights' without a corresponding discussion of 'responsibilities' is pretty much nursery school philosophy.

...and the chiefest responsibility is to defend your rights against those
seeking to subvert or infringe upon them in their quest for power and
domination. It all boils down to choice, if you choose to yield your rights, to
those who attempt to convince you with all manner of deception that you
have none, so be it but when you are enslaved don't complain that you
have no rights, when you were convinced to give them up without a fight.

So, do people have a 'right' to exist, sure.  Do I have an obligation to work so they can eat and stay alive even when they choose not too?  I doubt it.

You don't believe that I have the right to be left alone
to live, work and love as I see fit, as long as I harm no one?

Doing no harm includes not stealing from
others because your to lazy to work.

[Cindy]

Exactly my point Imaz.
I was being sarcastic, sorry.

CJ

[lisagurl]

Doing no harm includes not stealing from
others because your to lazy to work.

It has nothing to do with work or being a slave.

Not harming or stealing can have exceptions. Like in self defense.

The world is far from perfect and no one can count on automatic rights all the time. We can have faith that the system will provide justice but the majority of crimes go unpunished. Besides nothing can equal being killed. It can and does happen regardless of socially defined rights.

[tekla]

I keep looking at this title and thinking "Who wants to merely exist when you can choose to really live?"

[heatherrose]

I forget sometimes, that Susan's.org wraps around the world and some here
are young enough to still be in or fresh out of the government indoctrination
camps otherwise know as "public school", here in the United States. Realizing
this, I understand why the idea of individual rights and freedom seems such
an odd concept to some of y'all. So, I guess I'm just beating my head
against the wall here. If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand.

What a shame.   

[Pica Pica]

Of course, as far as it is represented to me, the key right that people really care about is the right to screw everyone else over for one's own benefit.

[Butterfly]

Well, our rights are based on needs and laws. You didn't ask to exist, you just do.  In terms of religion (if you're a believer) you're a creation and have a right to live/ exist as it's seen that 'god created you' therefore 'giving you' that right.

If you want to exist then you have every right to fight for that existence.

[heatherrose]

the right to screw everyone else over for one's own benefit.

"Screwing" you neighbor over is not a right. It is a CRIME.
or an infringement upon you neighbors rights. The original question
in this thread was "Do you HAVE the right..." Not "Do you
think that the world is going to hell in a handbarrow." I know that
we are faced with some very serious problems today as has been
the case since civilization began. Most of these problems have been
caused by the very people who tell us that they have the solution
and that solution seems to be:

• 1) afix the blame elsewhere.
• 2) pitting neighbor against neighbor.
• 3) telling us to turn our liberty over
  to them in exchange for security.

The rights that I was born with I will have until the day that I die. I fully
understand that my ability to exercise them may be curtailed by an
oppressive society but telling me I don't have them doesn't make it so. 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are [born] equal,
that they are endowed, [by being born] with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to
secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their
just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form
of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the
People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its
foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to
them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

[/list]

[tekla]

"Screwing" you neighbor over is not a right. It is a CRIME or an infringement upon you neighbors rights.

Steal a little, and they put you in jail. Steal a lot, and they make you king.

Bob Dylan, Sweetheart Like You, 1983

[lisagurl]

Steal a little, and they put you in jail. Steal a lot, and they make you king.

Or at least a award winning capitalist. They might even throw in a golden parachute.

[tekla]

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, golden parachute.

[Miniar]

I keep looking at this title and thinking "Who wants to merely exist when you can choose to really live?"

This, is probably the most awesome thing I've seen you say that I can remember at this time. I completely agree with you.
_

I have to add something to what I've previously stated.
If all human beings have a "right" to exist, then do we have a right to defend ourselves if our existence is threatened, even if that would mean threatening the existence of other human beings? Where do we draw the line as to what a man can do to preserve his existence?
And if we have this right to exist, is it not logical to extend that right to other things, beings objects, etc. We aren't "special", the planet, after all, can live without us but we can't live without it.
Does that simple fact, that we need something that doesn't need us, mean that that something has a greater right to existence, as since it'll probably exist even when all of mankind is long gone?

[heatherrose]

Or at least a award winning capitalist.

Show me a liar and I will show you a thief.

Show me a lying, thieving capitalist and I will show you lying, thieving socialist
and a lying, thieving communist and a lying, thieving anarchist and a lying, thieving....

[RebeccaFog]

The original post can be seen in several ways - Broad and Narrow.  The broad interpretation would involve 'human rights'. The narrow interpretation is simply 'the right to exist' in an entirely subjective view. I don't know if I used the word 'subjective' correctly on account of me being a product of a society that sings songs about hot dogs having a first name.

I'm interpreting it in the narrow sense, not in the sense of community, culture, and social interaction.

It is a philosophical question which is why I am interpreting it in the narrow sense. I interpret philosophy to be a kind of science that attempts to discuss matters without tainting them with personal opinions.

My method of determining the answer to the question is by imagining people in the before times when they had baerly learned to walk upright or speak. 

So, if jolene primate-woman is carrying her baby over to a clearing for some water and is brutalized by hungry hyenas, then that would seem to say something of the true nature of existence, which is that it is a roll of the dice. The hyena has the same right to existence as the human. So, then I conclude that no person has a right to exist. They just do.

[lisagurl]

So, then I conclude that no person has a right to exist. They just do.

Epicurus would agree. Many of our founding fathers were fond of his teachings. Natural laws seem to of been here long before political controls and man made rights. They did have slaves which keep most democracies afloat as ours started that way also. Now we have workers that slave for the aristocrats and they think they have freedom. How can an education system brainwash so many people?

[Jester]

Yeah there is no guarantee. I'm Sort of a pessimist. You're right about defending the rights of others but only because we're a minority. Majorities win basically by default. We need to prove ourselves more and defending other rights gives us the strength of numbers that we lack.