Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!floyd!whuxlb!pyuxll!eisx!npoiv!npois!hogpc!hogpd!jrrt
From: jrrt@hogpd.UUCP (R.MITCHELL)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Natural Rights
Message-ID: <117@hogpd.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 23-Aug-83 08:14:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: hogpd.117
Posted: Tue Aug 23 08:14:31 1983
Date-Received: Wed, 24-Aug-83 00:57:07 EDT
Lines: 37


   I disagree with the thesis that rights are "natural".  The writer who 
claimed that rights are pervasive in animal societies, and that such rights
had survival value, is anthropomorphizing the animal kingdom.
   Rights only exist when they are granted by individuals, or 
organizations, and are accepted by the recipients.  Thus, the concept of
rights seems to be based on however the individuals or the organizations feel 
at the moment.
   I suggest that "rights" are fictions.  There are no such things as rights, 
only courtesies that are extended from one person to another.
   Given that rights are actually only courtesies, what are the consequences?
   First, no one is obligated to extend a given courtesy to every one else.
In other words, I owe society nothing.  Hence, smokers *may* light up in a
poorly-ventilated room while I'm in there (although I would encourage them not
to, and rather strongly).  Or as another example, women don't have an intrinsic
"right" to be paid as much as men (or vice versa, of course).
   Second, no one can expect to receive a given courtesy from everyone, or even
anyone.  Therefore, society owes me nothing.  It is inappropriate for me to
expect society to universally embrace my Code of Courtesy.  Therefore, I must
not insist that the government is obliged to give me a student loan.  I may
want the loan very much, and I may want it without draft-registration strings, 
but such a loan is not part of the Natural Order of Things.  I must convince
the government to extend such a courtesy to me (this is done by writing 
Congress, etc).
   Third, when a courtesy is not extended to you that you want, or if a
discourtesy is done to you, you may do whatever you feel is appropriate.
Suffer silently, complain to the smoker, move, douse the cigarette with a
bucket of water -- choose an alternative (thereby extending a courtesy or
discourtesy) and endure the result.
   The bottom line is: rights are artificial, and you should not expect
everyone to accept your version of OK/not OK.  Arguments that state, "...
it is my right to ... [drive over 55, drive under 55, smoke, flame, etc]"
are void of truth.  At best, you can reasonably state, "These are the
courtesies that I will extend to you and that I want you to extend to me:"
and then proceed to enumerate two sets.  Note that if the set of
courtesies you extend is the same as the set you want extended to you,
then you live by the Golden Rule.