Rules and differing opinions

[DirtyCoconuts]

Originally Posted by Subrosa

I strongly disagree that living a society necessitates giving up rights or freedoms. Rights are innate, and not granted nor taken away merely by virtue of the company one chooses to keep. Society implies government, and government either respects or does not respect our innate rights and freedoms. But when going on to someone else's private property it is quite often the case that you do give up rights in order to have the property owner's permission to be there.

Subrosa. What I said was not an opinion. It is a foundational maxim of political science so I am sure I was not clear

The easiest example is this. In the time of cavemen it was beneficial to work together however it required adherence to an order. The simplest of terms no murder no stealing. If you don’t adhere you are killed or exiled. You still have the ABILITY to do those things, you have just given up the RIGHT to do so.

Rights are not innate, they are the agreed upon constructs of a given group.

I am not talking at all about inherent freedom of thought and am not suggesting if it is right or wrong in the moral sense but everyone has “given up” many of the rights they would have on their own for the benefits of the society.
These are what law are. They are what we have determined we don’t want in our society and so we outlaw that behavior.

The right to kill. The right to steal. I do not have these rights

[Subrosa]

Originally Posted by DirtyCoconuts

Subrosa. What I said was not an opinion. It is a foundational maxim of political science so I am sure I was not clear

The easiest example is this. In the time of cavemen it was beneficial to work together however it required adherence to an order. The simplest of terms no murder no stealing. If you don’t adhere you are killed or exiled. You still have the ABILITY to do those things, you have just given up the RIGHT to do so.

Rights are not innate, they are the agreed upon constructs of a given group.

I am not talking at all about inherent freedom of thought and am not suggesting if it is right or wrong in the moral sense but everyone has “given up” many of the rights they would have on their own for the benefits of the society.
These are what law are. They are what we have determined we don’t want in our society and so we outlaw that behavior.

The right to kill. The right to steal. I do not have these rights

The flaw in that logic lies your definition of rights, and in the fundamental nature of rights. One tenet is that all people possess the same fundamental rights, whether or not the system they live under respects those rights. Since the primary right is the right to one's own life and each person has that right, there can be no right for one person to take the life of another, except in self defense, which is also a basic human right. Same goes for property.