Is It Right To Have Children?

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by JimmyTbag, Sep 12, 2014.

  1. #41 Account_Banned283, Sep 15, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2014
     
    It cannot be a ''natural right'' to murder somebody, as that would impede upon that persons ''natural right'' to life.
     
     
    Rights remain ''rights'' by virtue of the fact that an authority can by its own powers alone neither grant nor abolish them.

     
    As for Anti-Natalism, I find that the majority of lives (humans) are in the larger part happy ones, and that subscribing to such a philosophy, whilst eliminating inevitable pain, also eliminates (more?) inevitable happiness. :D

     
  2. What's an authority? The idea of a right only exists in relation to an authority. If there is no authority, then there is no need to speak of rights.
     
  3. #43 Account_Banned283, Sep 15, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2014
     
    Authority;
     
    ''A person or organization having political or administrative power and control.''
     
    EDIT; Clearly, rights exist regardless of the consent/denial of an authority/s and can be spoken of independently from the same - but there is little use I suspect in me trying to explain that to you though. -_-
     
  4. #44 yurigadaisukida, Sep 15, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 15, 2014
    Fixed. Authority is an illusion. All that exists is power

    Example. No one has the authority to tell me not to smoke weed.

    They claim the authority but without force they can't do shit
    Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
     
  5. #45 Account_Banned283, Sep 15, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2014
     
    Well, if power does exist, and either a person or an organization holds it, they thereby become an authority because of them holding it..
     
  6. ..............regardless of being unsuitable or inappropriate
     
  7. [quote name="Account_Banned283" post="20613648" timestamp="1410734555"]It cannot be a ''natural right'' to murder somebody, as that would impede upon that persons ''natural right'' to life.quote]

    I'd disagree with this. Personally I don't think anyone has the 'right' to do anything. But as long as we're talking about natural rights, I'd say anyone has the natural right to do anything. If I can kill someone, what's stopping me? Nature put me on this earth, anything I do surely is my right? Although I think right is the wrong word since as stated before it suggests that someone has given you this right. Really off topic here guys


    Sent
     
  8. #48 Account_Banned283, Sep 15, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2014
     
    I'd disagree with this. Personally I don't think anyone has the 'right' to do anything. But as long as we're talking about natural rights, I'd say anyone has the natural right to do anything. If I can kill someone, what's stopping me? Nature put me on this earth, anything I do surely is my right?
     
    No, not anything you ''do'' is your right, because an ability to do something does not confer you with the ''right'' to do it - the term ''natural right'' does not imply that nature herself has conferred that right, but that that right is an inborn entitlement, which, when exercised, does not cross the natural rights of another, i.e a right to happiness/freedom of speech - thus any action that counteracts that ''inborn entitlement'' goes against the provision of nature, and in this case, the cardinal provision - the right to life.
     
    Although I think right is the wrong word since as stated before it suggests that someone has given you this right.
     
    Actually, it doesn't - the complete opposite is true. -_-
     
  9. Like I said, a right only exists in accordance with the idea of authourity. Authourity only exists if acknowledged. In a sense, nature can be considered to be an authourity, but how could one go against nature? Killing is just as much in accordance with the dictate of nature as not.

    Nature is the very laws of our existence. There are no rights granted naturally. All actions are rightful for us to perform by the very idea of us being able to perform them.
     
  10. #50 Omega369, Sep 15, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 15, 2014
    I think babies should be bred from the best genetics. No people with genetic diseases, just a perfect gene pool. Blond hair, blue eyes.

    Maybe everyone else should be kept in locked down camps, I dunno maybe conduct science experiments

    Let's keep gypsies in there too

    Hopefully there are sweet uniforms

    Omega369
     
  11. Now that I read the OP (also I'm the type of race that would be put into a concentration camp), I think that's just viewing the world in a negative way.

    What if the baby grows up to be someone great. A leader that will change the world into a better place?


    d[-_-]b
     
  12. #52 Account_Banned283, Sep 15, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2014
     
    Clearly, pickled, you either don't actually know what the word ''authority'' means, or you choose to ignore the definition of it, which I've posted above, and choose to use the word with as much liberty as is necessary to slot into your argument. Here it is again;
     
     
  13. You have the right to be single all your life. You have the right to be childless all your life. These are lessons in the bible. It's ok.
     
  14.  
    I'm speaking of the nature of authority in this world. It is one of acknowledgement. We acknowledge authority and thus it exists. One can establish authority through power by making others submit. I'm not sure what you're trying to say. What I'm saying doesn't go against any definition, it is simply how it works.
     
  15.  
    Your original comment said that a right implied an authority granting that right - so, no, you weren't speaking about the nature of an authority, you were speaking of how rights are conferred by the power of an authority - which is false. :rolleyes:
     
  16.  
     
    so how do we know what is a natural right and what is not. why would i be entitled to freedom of speech but not freedom to kill someone? (disclaimer, I may be coming off as a little eager to murder but its just an example) how do we have a right to life when anyone could die at any moment? why don't stillborn babies have a right to life? 
     
    all I'm trying to get across is that i don't think rights exist in nature, theres no such thing as a natural given right unless it's given by some form of higher being/energy/divinity 
     
    Just my opinion i guess 
     
  17. ah of course i forgot about the bible, not sure why i didn't look there first
     
    https://soundcloud.com/boomfestival/sets/boom-fsetival-2014-chill-out
     
  18. You say that, but i say chickens periodically shit out gold nuggets. I can say anything is false, that does not make it false. We have a natural right to do anything within our ability, this is the very same as having no rights. The very idea of a right implies giving authority to something other than yourself.
     
  19. #59 Account_Banned283, Sep 16, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2014
     
    A natural right is one that can serve for the benefit of each human being whilst not crossing the natural/political/legal rights of another, thus freedom of speech, since it pertains directly to one individual alone, is permitted under the category of a natural right, but murder, which necessarily crosses the cardinal natural right of another - the right to life - is not.
     
    I've already explained that the notion of ''natural rights'' does not entail that nature herself has conferred those rights;
     
     
     
    Having a natural right to do anything is, in fact, the very opposite of having no rights to do anything, but hey, that's simple logic, and it doesn't apply to your mode of thinking - since, in the first case, you referenced ''An Authority'', which is something other than ''giving authority to an idea'' (which is how your using the word now, wittingly or not) I'll just post the definition of ''Authority'' again, so that you might come to understand why your first post, taken as it was written, was false.
     
     
  20. I really get tired of the human race being seen as a destructive force on an apocalyptic scale.

    it's ridiculous and just flat-out ignorant.



    There's plenty of wilderness.. you've just been seduced by alarmism.  It's nice to know you care, but in reality, if they cant adapt, they die.  If it weren't humans, it would be some other animal.  Then should we blame the animal for everything simply because it was a better opportunist?   Dont blast our species..  blast the members of our species that dont care.
     

Share This Page