Basic Human Rights?
Published Sun, Nov 20 2011 11:52 AM
I like to talk about our unalienable rights, Life, Liberty, the pursuit of Happiness… you know. I’m fond of them. I also like to talk about those rights that are specifically protected in the constitution, such as the right to bear arms and the freedom of speech. I also like to talk about the distinction between rights, privileges and entitlements.
Now, apparently there’s a new “basic human right”, at least according to the United Nations. Apparently Internet access is a fundamental human right. Since when do the fundamental rights given to us by God include access to technology created by others? You know, I’m really fed up with this sort of thing.
The right to bear arms might be considered as a grant of a right to the technology of others (arms manufacturers) by some. But really it isn’t. The right to bear arms is implicit in the right to life. After all, if we have the right to life we have the right to defend ourselves by whatever means come to hand whether it be rocks, sticks or anything else we can legitimately acquire.
But Internet access? Give me a break. The right to express your opinion doesn’t extend to the right to commandeer something that belongs to someone else so that you can disseminate that opinion.
In fact, that’s what I find so offensive about so many of the so-called rights asserted by the United Nations or by the “Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man”. They essentially declare that you can take what belongs to someone else or force someone else to do your bidding.
The rights that God gave us as individuals – those rights that we cannot be separated from – all have a couple of things in common. First, they are inherent in our being. Second, they establish what we may do for ourselves. The exercise of these rights is the expression of individual liberty.
The rights that the United Nations wants to give to Man have nothing to do with the individual – except as an assertion that the individual has no right to property or to the fruits of his own labor and that he must be a slave to society. These aren’t rights at all. They’re group entitlements and nothing but slavery.
The League of Nations was a bad idea. The United Nations is even worse.
Trackback URI for this post: http://perrinelson.com/track.aspx?postid=1494
Permalink URI for this post: http://perrinelson.com/2011/11/20/1494.aspx
Subscribe to this entry's
comment feed. (Atom)
David responded with:
 | But, Perri, it is my "right" to take whatever I can by force or guile (and to hire thugs if I can to get someone else'sstuff for me), isn't it? I mean, after all, what is government for anyway?
*sigh* |
Perri Nelson responded with:
 | Actually it's for protection from people that assert those sort of "rights" that men leave the state of nature to enter into society. If the society itself asserts them against a man then he has gained nothing and lost everything by joining with other men into that society. |
David responded with:
| Aw, Perri, can't you let me channel the "Occupy Whatever" animals without injecting reason into the discussion? ;-) |
Angel responded with:
 | well it seems CA-IR has managed to already shut down an anti jeehadi website..say good bye to freedom forever! Have a great Monday my friend.:) |
theMachiavellian responded with:
 | Exactly Perri. I've has always despised the term "human rights", as to me it entails group rights doled out by government.
The problem with group rights is that certain groups fall out of favor with the government, their rights can be taken away.
Individual rights, rights bestowed upon you by the Creator, are an inherent part of your being. No government on earth has the right to interfere with something given by God. Government didn't give you the right to life, liberty, and property, and damn well can't take it away from you.
The First and Second Treatise should be required reading, in grade and high school and it should be frequently revisited. |
Comments to this entry are closed.