To argue that people have a right that imposes obligations on another is an absurd concept. A better term for new-fangled rights to health care, decent housing and food is wishes. If we called them wishes, I would be in agreement with most other Americans for I, too, wish that everyone had adequate health care, decent housing and nutritious meals. However, if we called them human wishes, instead of human rights, there would be confusion and cognitive dissonance. The average American would cringe at the thought of government punishing one person because he refused to be pressed into making someone else's wish come true.
I hope the average Australian would cringe as well.
2 comments:
A journalist and fellow resident in the Canada Bay area, I am very interested in doing an interview with you, whether by phone, in person, or email.
How can I get in contact with you?
Please contact me c_connelly@hotmail.com.
"To argue that people have a right that imposes obligations on another is an absurd concept."
IMHO that has to be about the most bizarre comment I've heard in a very long time. Simply to coexist with others imposes both rights and obligations on every individual. As I understand it, my fellow motorists have a right not be killed or injured so in Australia I have an obligation to drive on the left.
Imagine how far this notion of "no obligations" would get you in a rifle group.
Post a Comment