Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea
Wrong again.
Men are born into nature. By virtue of nature, men possess certain abilities.
It is my position that mankind has at birth inchoate rights which either mature or whither according to civility or incivility. If one becomes an animal, that person possesses only those rights he or she can protect via the flesh.
Persons developing in a civil manner, can congregate together creating a social contract divesting of mature rights for the augmentation of those rights.
If persons such as detainees remove themselves from society, their rights remain inchoate and societies need not recognize the maturity of something never matured.
As to your incorrect argument that it forces entities to make judgments, all a "fair hearing" is an entity judgment, so your argument is circular.
A false dichotomy was posed by you, not nuanced or recognizing reality.
|
You are missing the basic point. Whether or not rights may be restricted later on is not debatable. Of course they can, depending on, as you put it, a person's "incivility." However, the determination of "incivility" must only be made AFTER due process has been given to that person, which is why due process is the linchpin of all natural rights. To remove due process is to concede that our rights flow from government.