Flying Squid@lemmy.world to People Twitter@sh.itjust.works · 9 months agoWe don't earn it.lemmy.worldimagemessage-square134fedilinkarrow-up11.17Karrow-down141
arrow-up11.13Karrow-down1imageWe don't earn it.lemmy.worldFlying Squid@lemmy.world to People Twitter@sh.itjust.works · 9 months agomessage-square134fedilink
minus-squareFlying Squid@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down1·edit-29 months ago No one, neither me nor you has an inalienable right to be alive I mean… The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (plus, you know, murder laws) may disagree with you. But have fun with your libertarianism.
minus-squareUmmdustry@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down2·9 months agoOk, prosecute all eight billion of us for the murder of the seventy million that died last year, see how that works out for you.
minus-squareFlying Squid@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·9 months agoWhat are you even talking about now?
minus-squareUmmdustry@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down2·9 months agoPositive Vs. Negative rights, we’ve been talking about it this entire time. Saying “You can’t murder him” is different from “You can’t let him die”
minus-squareFlying Squid@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up4·9 months agoAgain- Universal Declaration on Human Rights. It cannot be any clearer. I’ll even show you the relevant article. It’s very concise: Maybe you are not in one of the 48 of 58 UN member states in existence at the time that voted in favor of it. Note that there were no votes against it. If so, I’m sorry your country does not care about basic human rights.
minus-squareUmmdustry@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down2·9 months agoThen why does the UN let 60 million people die each year?
minus-squareFlying Squid@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up4·9 months agoAre you seriously asking why the UN is unable to defy biological and medical science?
minus-squareUmmdustry@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down2·9 months agoYes (but only rhetorically, I’m actually asking why you belive that some hypothetical future institution will be able to)
minus-squareFlying Squid@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·9 months agoI don’t? You seem to think that ‘right to life’ means ‘right to defy entropy.’ It doesn’t. I guess freedom speech isn’t a right because people in comas don’t have that ability?
I mean… The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (plus, you know, murder laws) may disagree with you. But have fun with your libertarianism.
Ok, prosecute all eight billion of us for the murder of the seventy million that died last year, see how that works out for you.
What are you even talking about now?
Positive Vs. Negative rights, we’ve been talking about it this entire time. Saying “You can’t murder him” is different from “You can’t let him die”
Again- Universal Declaration on Human Rights. It cannot be any clearer. I’ll even show you the relevant article. It’s very concise:
Maybe you are not in one of the 48 of 58 UN member states in existence at the time that voted in favor of it. Note that there were no votes against it.
If so, I’m sorry your country does not care about basic human rights.
Then why does the UN let 60 million people die each year?
Are you seriously asking why the UN is unable to defy biological and medical science?
Yes
(but only rhetorically, I’m actually asking why you belive that some hypothetical future institution will be able to)
I don’t?
You seem to think that ‘right to life’ means ‘right to defy entropy.’ It doesn’t.
I guess freedom speech isn’t a right because people in comas don’t have that ability?