Is there a right to self-defense?

[Nomad4Ever]

In one hundred years we may look back on people who eat meat today like we do now on people who used to own slaves.


Rights change

Just because what people think is moral changes doesn't mean morality changes. Slavery was never moral. Ever. It didn't matter that most people believed it was and the government supported it through law. Slavery didn't become immoral.

God I hate moral relativism so much.

 

[aociswundumho]

Again, if not the government. Perhaps the guy down the street should decide whether you live or die.

The government is "the guy down the street". When we refer to "the state" we are referring to a group of dirtbag politicians and bureaucrats.

 

[Antiwar]

It is a protected right by the ninth amendment of the US constitution

Support your claim with evidence.

 

[Evilroddy]

Support your claim with evidence.

Antiwar:

Read the 9th Amendment.

Ninth Amendment

www.law.cornell.edu

Why am I doing this for you? The two sources already provided were not enough for you?

Cheers, be well and stay safe.
Evilroddy.

 

[vegas giants]

Just because what people think is moral changes doesn't mean morality changes. Slavery was never moral. Ever. It didn't matter that most people believed it was and the government supported it through law. Slavery didn't become immoral.

God I hate moral relativism so much.

No that's exactly what it means. Morality is just your morals...and that changes over time


There may be a time when people say meat was never moral

 

[Hypothetical]

You don't get to tell me if I can complain or not.


You can't list these inherent rights so it's all just an opinion if they even exist at all

how, if the state gets to decide whether you live or die, can it not also decide whether you can complain or not? why do they have to allow you to complain? Who is going to MAKE them do so?

if the government is the final arbiter of rights and the law says you can't complain, what do you do then?

 

[vegas giants]

how, if the state gets to decide whether you live or die, can it not also decide whether you can complain or not? why do they have to allow you to complain? Who is going to MAKE them do so?

if the government is the final arbiter of rights and the law says you can't complain, what do you do then?

The state can decide to kill me for just complaining. That is just a fact.

I can choose to complain anyway. Many have....and died for it


The government in a democracy is the people ....and I am fine with letting the people decide what are rights

 

[Hypothetical]

The state can decide to kill me for just complaining. That is just a fact.

I can choose to complain anyway. Many have....and died for it


The government in a democracy is the people ....and I am fine with letting the people decide what are rights

Exactly, so you are exercising an inherent right... the right to self determination, regardless of consequence.

that IS what we are speaking of.

I also believe the right to self defense and to speak out are inherent and that any government that opposes them , oppose freedom at its very core, and morally can be abolished without prejudice.

 

[vegas giants]

Exactly, so you are exercising an inherent right... the right to self determination, regardless of consequence.

that IS what we are speaking of.

I also believe the right to self defense and to speak out are inherent and that any government that opposes them , oppose freedom at its very core, and morally can be abolished without prejudice.

In your opinion. I believe you are just exercising your own opinion on morality


I just wish someone could show me these golden tablets that have the complete list of natural rights on them


If my list is different from yours....who is right?

 

[Hypothetical]

In your opinion. I believe you are just exercising your own opinion on morality


I just wish someone could show me these golden tablets that have the complete list of natural rights on them


If my list is different from yours....who is right?

at the very core of the argument, It is the same as it always has been throughout history, unfortunately... the one who is stronger through pure strength, alliances, or is willing to go the furthest to implement their version.

I have precedent though, in the form of the founders of the greatest republic on the earth. Still, it's just words if we are not willing to defend it.

 

[vegas giants]

at the very core of the argument, It is the same as it always has been throughout history, unfortunately... the one who is stronger through pure strength, alliances, or is willing to go the furthest to implement their version.

I have precedent though, in the form of the founders of the greatest republic on the earth. Still, it's just words if we are not willing to defend it.

Well you have the opinions of a bunch of guys who went home at night and raped their slaves so theirs views on rights is a little distorted

 

[Buckeyes85]

Yes. Any reasonable person would say yes. It is a fundamental moral principle that protects your autonomy as a person.

Defense against violence being enacted on you? That's generally what people mean when they say 'self-defense'. Unless you are using the term in some strange way.

I am late to the party, but this post should have ended the thread. What more need be said?

 

[Hypothetical]

Well you have the opinions of a bunch of guys who went home at night and raped their slaves so theirs views on rights is a little distorted

Hyperbole does not suit this discussion.

 

[vegas giants]

Hyperbole does not suit this discussion.

That is a fact....not hyperbole.

 

[Hypothetical]

That is a fact....not hyperbole.

 

[Buckeyes85]

No that's exactly what it means. Morality is just your morals...and that changes over time


There may be a time when people say meat was never moral

That is not correct.
Humans are omnivores. We eat meat and vegetables. That is a biological fact of our nature that is beyond argument. It is not, and never has been an issue of morality. Frankly, it is rather silly to even suggest that it is.

 

[vegas giants]

We know for a fact Jefferson raped his slave. It was a common practice

 

[vegas giants]

That is not correct.
Humans are omnivores. We eat meat and vegetables. That is a biological fact of our nature that is beyond argument. It is not, and never has been an issue of morality. Frankly, it is rather silly to even suggest that it is.

That is an opinion. You don't need to eat meat to survive

 

[Indydave]

of course there is......where we as a nation have gone wrong is equating self defense with owning weapons of mass destruction......

 

[Hypothetical]

We know for a fact Jefferson raped his slave. It was a common practice

yet you implied a lot more than just Jefferson doing it.. hyperbole.

 

[Hypothetical]

of course there is......where we as a nation have gone wrong is equating self defense with owning weapons of mass destruction......

if semi auto rifles are WMD, then that puts a whole new perspective on the gulf war.

 

[vegas giants]

yet you implied a lot more than just Jefferson doing it.. hyperbole.

Well we definitely know a lot had slaves. The practice was not uncommon.

But this avoids the point

 

[Hypothetical]

Well we definitely know a lot had slaves. The practice was not uncommon.

But this avoids the point

unfortunately, slaves were common throughout history, so no it doesn't

slaves came in many forms, from the serfs to the lords of kings, indebted servants, multi racial slaves in ancient rome, slaves of peoples captured by mongols, the african slave trade... so it is not like the practice was uncommon.

hell in my opinion , if someone can legally terminate your life or beat you on their whim, you are by all definitions a slave. by that standard, enlisted men in the royal navy were slaves of a sort... and before you comment, no , not all of them signed up for it.

but the words written by the founders were so genius to be crafted so as to apply to all human beings and thus very , very special in it's implementation and for moral purpose that I believe that is the point and what we have to focus on.

 

[vegas giants]

unfortunately, slaves were common throughout history, so no it doesn't

slaves came in many forms, from the serfs to the lords of kings, indebted servants, multi racial slaves in ancient rome, slaves of peoples captured by mongols, the african slave trade... so it is not like the practice was uncommon.

hell in my opinion , if someone can legally terminate your life or beat you on their whim, you are by all definitions a slave. by that standard, enlisted men in the royal navy were slaves of a sort... and before you comment, no , not all of them signed up for it.

but the words written by the founders were so genius to be crafted so as to apply to all human beings and thus very , very special in it's implementation and for moral purpose that I believe that is the point and what we have to focus on.

Yes you have opinions even on what constitutes a slave.

The founder's were men...flawed men that got some right and some wrong


Hardly gods of morality

 

[cpwill]

You don't get to tell me if I can complain or not.

If Floyd's rights were not being violated, then he has no basis for that complaint other than his own preferences; it's in the same category as my complaint about a new development going up that's going to increase commute time, or my wife's complaint about me wearing ratty old t shirts around the house. It's immaterial.

You can't list these inherent rights so it's all just an opinion if they even exist at all

Life, Liberty, and Property are the baseline categories. Self defense falls into two of those camps, as you have the right to defend yourself from both physical threats and threats to your liberty.