this post was submitted on 29 May 2024
-46 points (7.4% liked)
Controversial - the place to discuss controversial topics
433 readers
1 users here now
Controversial - the community to discuss controversial topics.
Challenge others opinions and be challenged on your own.
This is not a safe space nor an echo-chamber, you come here to discuss in a civilized way, no flaming, no insults!
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, "trust me bro" is not a valid argument.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nice pivot. Your point is about rights, but in your argument you equate that with sympathy.
Even a person who doesn't deserve sympathy deserves, or rather has human rights – even when they're violated.
When you boil it down, that's what rights are, government sympathy. The government feels sympathy to its citizens so it trys to protect them by giving them rights. Take North Korea for example, that dictator has no sympathy and in turn the people have no nights. If tomorrow the government said we don't have rights, then what are we going to do about it?
Using this logic the prison system is a violation of rights. If prisoners still deserve to have rights then why can't they vote, or own a gun? The prison system is a direct violation of a human's rights yet everyone agrees we need it to have a civil society
Taking away a prisoner's right to vote is wrong (not to mention dangerous for a democracy) and not everyone agrees with it.
Owning a gun isn't a human right.
And a government is an entity made up of rules and thousands of people who constantly change. It can't feel sympathy towards individuals.
Anyway, you're quick to claim that "everyone agrees" or "no one would reasonably believe" the points you are for or against, but you have an incredibly US-centric view, and not even half the US citizens would agree with you.
Yet it still happens because rights are given by government, not inherented by birth
Owning a gun isn't a human right
It is in America, which further proves my point that this idea of Rights being deserved and internationally had is flawed. Your rights are given to you by your country. Not God, or the universe, or society. Rights are a human construct that can be taken away at any moment for any reason
I understand if you think this isn't fair, your entitled to your opinion, but I simply disagree on it, I believe in an eye for an eye.
You say a government is made up of people... but also say it can't feel sympathy? So then who creates the laws and decides what's illegal? If governments can't have sympathy then why is searching someone's house without a warrant illegal? You could make the argument that if you have nothing to hide why can't they search? Yet we all understand this to be wrong because we and the people who make laws (who made up government) have sympathy.
Forgot to respond to this
Which is also wrong.
In 2016 Indonesia passed a law authorising chemical castration
The Czech Republic still uses surgical castration regularly
Russia, Poland, and South Korea still use chemical castration as a preventative measure.
So no. This isn't "American centric". You people are just defending child rapists.
Tell me you're a teenager without saying those words exactly.
Check.