It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What are your basic RIGHTS, and what should they cost YOU?

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: grainofsand

Ok, so those striking docs ... if you need health care and they are refusing to provide it ... does that give you the power to march up to one, put him or her in chains and beat the snot out of her until he or she complies and gives you care?

We had a system like that in the US once for getting forced labor. I'm not so sure I'd want my health care provided that way though.

Oh dear, you appear to be missing the point of the 'right' in this discussion.
Even if a government has challenges providing the right of whatever to it's citizens then it does not stop being a right in principle. Come on I thought you would see that?

The right to bear arms in the US is only granted by the biggest gang in town, and the constitution CAN be changed, so your 'right' is nothing more than another piece of legislation written by the biggest gang in town.




posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: crazyewok

You have the right to keep and bear arms, not have them provided to you. Not quite the same thing.

The right to health care presumes you are being cared for meaning someone is giving you care.


And why cant you grasp the concept that in the UK our culture is just different. Healthcare here is a birth right?

It is because it is here.

If you dont like it? Well nothing compels you to ever visit the UK does it?

And the yes there may be a strike but due to it being a vital service and a right HERE (not in the US but HERE)there will be strike rules so essential services are not effected. In fact the whole point of the strike is to counter the governments actions that may in pact on our right to quality care, fighting for that said right. Same way as in the US you have the "right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness" but that doesn't stop you having to risk your life now and top protect said rights. so again the strikes a lot more deeper than your fox "news" is making out to you.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

No, that's an entitled mentality.

I do not think of things that my fellow citizens have to provide for me as rights. To start doing that invites the mindset that we should becomes collectivists, that their property should be mine to use as I see fit for my benefit when it isn't mine in the first place.

The doctor is worthy of his hire. His skills are worthy of compensation, not mine to use as I see fit, when I see fit as I would my car. I respect him and what he has had to do to earn those skills which took far more time and effort than I put into my own education.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: grainofsand

Still you miss the point and try to fall back on the ability to change the constitution.

The point I am making is that it can be changed right back and the citizens that are armed win the battle.

It would do one no good to attempt to change the laws and get shot for it.

The same with freedom of speech. The man with a gun can say what he wants.

Being an unarmed citizen is a dangerous endeavor.



Ok, lets play this scenario out. Congress passes a law banning handguns and gives everyone 90 days to comply with a buyback program. On the 91st day they cross reference the guns not bought back with the list of registered guns. You decided to keep your handgun. The police come to your door. Are you going to shoot them? What are you going to do when SWAT shows up? Lets say an entire town refuses this law and the national guard is sent in. Are you going to shoot your fellow Americans?

How far would you go over a gun that is now by law illegal to own making you a criminal.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: schuyler

So, urm, who exactly defines and enforces these particular mahgical 'rights' you speak of?
The biggest gang in town? The community or wider society?

Different societies/nations, different rights.
Cultural semantics is all, and you take comfort or security deluding yourself with the trickery of rights/entitlements/privileges, they can all be taken away, and different cultures have different rights.

The biggest gang in town always controls the rights, don't delude yourself that the constitution defines 'rights' for the whole world and cannot be changed.


We are working off the definition of right.

Clearly you do not get that.

A right is something that imposes NO obligation on anyone else in order for you to have it. Things like education and health care do that. In that case, they are not rights. They are civil privileges that can only be guaranteed by society as a whole and thus can change on a whim.

Do you really think if society disappeared tomorrow that you would still have that health care that you have a "right" to?
So where exactly do you get your definition of a 'right' from then? Mosts dictionaries are along the lines of a moral or legal entitlement to have or do something, yet you give added value of 'something which requires no action/loss from another' etc.

Come on, where do you take this definition of a 'right' from, the constitution which can be changed? Where?



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: grainofsand

No, that's an entitled mentality.

I do not think of things that my fellow citizens have to provide for me as rights. To start doing that invites the mindset that we should becomes collectivists, that their property should be mine to use as I see fit for my benefit when it isn't mine in the first place.

The doctor is worthy of his hire. His skills are worthy of compensation, not mine to use as I see fit, when I see fit as I would my car. I respect him and what he has had to do to earn those skills which took far more time and effort than I put into my own education.



Yes in YOUR CULTURE.

It is not in OURS.

Why cant you just accept the fact the UK is not the god dam US of #ing A? We haven't been the same since 1783.

Our cultures and our mentality's are just plain different on the regards of healthcare? Cant you grasp that?

Cant you grasp the UK will NEVER not with out a fight give up our healthcare rights anymore than the US will give up its guns and move on?

Why the need to force AMERICAN values on us?



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   
I think someone who is thirsty has a right to trap drinking water in a barrel, but my city council doesn't agree. They made it unlawful for anyone to catch water in a container when it falls as rain. The city councils of the nation that do this really should be horsewhipped until they apologize publicly. That would put a stop to that nonsense.

Or they just hunker down and get even more contemptuous of anyone who lays claim to anything government wishes to control. This is usually what happens, and it happens because we don't horse whip our misbehaving leaders! You would get slapped with a felony for doing that or a gross misdemeanor so we usually don't horse whip our leaders because of that little problem.

I feel a person has a right to everything, but not at someone else's expense. If you need a car, get a job and buy one. If you need a home you can get one if you have a job, but nowadays there are a lot of hurdles, like credit scores and financial responsibility laws that make buying a home impossible for those with poor credit and especially with no job.

You can make anything your right if you do something about it and make it happen by working for it to happen. No one owes someone else all of life's good things just because they are poor. That doesn't mean helping the poor is bad though. Once you help some people, they think the world owes it all to them for free.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: grainofsand

No, that's an entitled mentality.

I do not think of things that my fellow citizens have to provide for me as rights. To start doing that invites the mindset that we should becomes collectivists, that their property should be mine to use as I see fit for my benefit when it isn't mine in the first place.

The doctor is worthy of his hire. His skills are worthy of compensation, not mine to use as I see fit, when I see fit as I would my car. I respect him and what he has had to do to earn those skills which took far more time and effort than I put into my own education.

Everyone is ruled by the biggest gang in town and they set the 'rights' whether it is the US, UK, or Nomadic tribe then the 'rights' are set by whoever is in charge.
You have your 'rights' in the US as we have ours in the UK, now I'd be grateful to read where you get your definition of rights from?



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: stolencar18

education as a right? Depends on your definition of education I suppose. You have a right to go to the public library I suppose. Do you have the right for someone else to teach you? I don't think so. You pay for that service. If you can't afford it then you use your God given ingenuity to figure out how to get it. After I ran out of money my sophomore year in college I enlisted in the military to get the GI Bill benefits and save money to finish my education, which I completed going to night school. That is the problem I see on campuses today. These people who are protesting do not want to take responsibility for themselves and earn an education. If your parents are not rich (and mine certainly weren't) then get another plan. I also wanted to go to an Ivy League school but couldn't afford it so settled for a state college. I would have loved to attend the major state university in my state but just couldn't afford it. Didn't want to bury myself in loans so took another route. These kids today seem to be so self-entitled that none of the discriminators I applied to my plans are realistic or acceptable for kids today. I do not challenge their desire to attend the best universities but if they are crying about the expense AFTER they enroll, well perhaps they should not have matriculated.

The BS that is happening on campuses now is a sad and embarrassing picture of how far the young people of our country have slipped in terms of responsibility, self discipline, mental toughness, and ingenuity. The nonsense about white privilege is so ridiculous and screams that these people are either being coached and can't think for themselves or that they don't understand real life. I could write a book on why I personally did not benefit from anything close to white privilege and I am nothing special. But I was raised properly to be responsible for myself and to not depend on anyone else to solve my problems. Not only are these kids showing their lack of understanding what that means but their parents should be completely embarrassed that they did not teach their kids any better.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
I never made the claim that the us government does not make or change laws.

I made the claim that millions of guns pointed at the gov. keeps our ability to have a constitution and protect it.


But it doesn't. In fact I could give you literally 1000 examples where people have fought vehemently for gun rights at the expense of their political capital in defending every other right. In reality the exact opposite of what you're claiming has come true. Because of defending gun rights we have the Patriot Act, NDAA, the police have extremely loose use of force guidelines, you have no right against search and seizure because of the danger of you having a weapon, and many others.


originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: crazyewok

You have the right to keep and bear arms, not have them provided to you. Not quite the same thing.

The right to health care presumes you are being cared for meaning someone is giving you care.


Then you acknowledge that the government can outlaw the sale of every weapon and ammunition on the basis that you have no right to have weapons provided to you, only that you can have one if you somehow get it?

Which is interesting because the courts have the opposite opinion, that would in fact constitute a violation of the Second Amendment, so that means that if you have a right to something there is a compulsion for people to provide it to you.
edit on 13-11-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 04:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: schuyler
No we wont force "you".


Obviously were you are healthcare is not a right and your not British so we are not forcing you to do anything.


The UK is not the USA and the USA is NOT the UK.

UK has a community and culture accepted healthcare as a right the same way Americans have accepted guns as a right.
Just accept that fact and move on!

What is people obsession with forcing US values on country's that dont share them? Insecurity?


Ok I'm going to explain this in simplest terms.

The US "right to bear arms" is a privilege/entitlement granted to people by other people, and protected by law.
The UK "right to free health care" is the same concept.

NEITHER are inalienable basic rights. A basic human right applies to you as a human, not as a citizen of Country X. Your rights go with you from America to the UK to Zimbabwe to China.

So...free education? Not a right.
Guns? Not a right.
Free speech? Hard to say.
Health care? Nope.

All of these can be taken away with the stroke of the right pen. Then what? Health care is a culture-supported privilege but it COULD be taken away. Will it? Doubtful. Could it? you betcha. And the sheer fact that exercising your "right" to this free health care costs the population money and costs a person his time and labour means that it is a service you pay for indirectly that an individual is compensated for. Doctors are forced to be doctors. If this was a right there would be doctor slaves...how well would that work?

I really don't know why you stand on your "BUT IN THE UK..." horse. No one cares what country you're in or what the opinion of the country is.

Health care is NOT a right. You are legally entitled to the privilege of "free" (read: no cost at time of service) health care.
You do not have the RIGHT to bear arms. People decided and wrote into law that you can hold a gun. People can take this away. There are not enough of you armed people out there to stop the government so get real.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: crazyewok

Healthcare here is a birth right?



You really need to get control of your Fox News fetish. You bring it up several times per day. It's absurd.

Now, on topic...health care is NOT a birth right. It is a privilege that you pay for, and by law you must have access to, BUT, if there are no doctors do you still have that right?

Your "birth right" is based on other people providing a service for compensation. That DEFINITIVELY makes it "not a right". You're misusing the word, and misunderstanding the concept.

Now, kindly educate yourself. I bet you Brits have a "right" to that too...



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: grainofsand

No, that's an entitled mentality.

I do not think of things that my fellow citizens have to provide for me as rights. To start doing that invites the mindset that we should becomes collectivists, that their property should be mine to use as I see fit for my benefit when it isn't mine in the first place.

The doctor is worthy of his hire. His skills are worthy of compensation, not mine to use as I see fit, when I see fit as I would my car. I respect him and what he has had to do to earn those skills which took far more time and effort than I put into my own education.



Yes in YOUR CULTURE.

It is not in OURS.

Why cant you just accept the fact the UK is not the god dam US of #ing A? We haven't been the same since 1783.

Our cultures and our mentality's are just plain different on the regards of healthcare? Cant you grasp that?

Cant you grasp the UK will NEVER not with out a fight give up our healthcare rights anymore than the US will give up its guns and move on?

Why the need to force AMERICAN values on us?


LOL this cracked me up. You're off your rocker pal. Good grief...

I don't care what your culture thinks. Culture does not define a right. Culture gives you privileges and perhaps entitlements.

Here's the question: Can your health care be taken away?

Answer: yes, of course. A lack of doctors. Lack of medicine. A legislative change.

Therefore: NOT a right. It's a privilege. I don't know why you can't understand that. Your only argument is 'WE'RE NOT YOU", which is a joke. This is about HUMAN rights. Not "what entitlements does each country grant its citizens?".

Your health care entitlement was granted by people - and paid for by people. It's completely different than a real human right.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 04:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: stolencar18
Your "birth right" is based on other people providing a service for compensation. That DEFINITIVELY makes it "not a right". You're misusing the word, and misunderstanding the concept.
So, I ask you the the same as I asked another US member who is yet to reply, where do you get your definition of a 'right' from exactly?
Most dictionaries are along the lines of 'a moral or legal entitlement to have or do something' but you give added value saying "service for compensation" which seems to be a US invention?

Please share your link to a source, perhaps the constitution maybe? I'm only guessing as that seems to be the only source you US guys have for your invented definition of what a 'right' is.
I await your answer so I may learn something new other than generic US citizen opinion.

Your 'rights' in the US are the same as ours in the UK...defined, allowed, and/or facilitated by the biggest gang in town.
,,,remember your constitution CAN be amended, it is just a piece of legislation, not the Holy Grail lol.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: icewater

The funny part about these kids protesting for free college is they think that taxing the rich would pay for it all. I don't want to debate the merits of taxing the rich, but the fact is that they think they're entitled to benefit from someone else's success. That's greed. They signed up for a service (getting an education provided to them) and in many cases APPLIED to join that university, and then when they got in they turn around and say it's too expensive.

So quit. You don't have a right to it. You signed up for a privilege you can't afford.

I really wish we could get Keely Mullen - the leader of the million student march - in this thread to ask her why she feels that education is a right, and why she feels she has the right to demand that others pay for it.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: stolencar18

Paying for an education is one thing, what's going on in most universities is something else entirely. People are being given debts that they can NEVER repay and they can't even declare bankruptcy on them. There would be a whole lot less complaining about free education if two things were true:
1. The cost of an education in any way reflected the market value of that education.
2. They were treated the same as every other debt.

Job requirements keep going up, to make $15/hour now you need a bachelors degree and that's rapidly approaching a masters degree. Spending $150,000 to jump from $10/hour to $15/hour is not a good deal but people believe they should be able to pursue jobs they would like to do. People who goto college don't want to be cashiers their entire lives, they want to be doctors, scientists, engineers, artists, designers, marketers, and many other professions. The system however is set up that this is not possible. The way it works now is you graduate college, get stuck in an entry level job, and 10 years later you're still there while your education/skills have atrophied and you still have almost as much debt as when you started thanks to interest. People see this happening and they want it changed, and frankly they're 100% right to want it changed.



posted on Nov, 14 2015 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: grainofsand

Still you miss the point and try to fall back on the ability to change the constitution.

The point I am making is that it can be changed right back and the citizens that are armed win the battle.

It would do one no good to attempt to change the laws and get shot for it.

The same with freedom of speech. The man with a gun can say what he wants.

Being an unarmed citizen is a dangerous endeavor.



Ok, lets play this scenario out. Congress passes a law banning handguns and gives everyone 90 days to comply with a buyback program. On the 91st day they cross reference the guns not bought back with the list of registered guns. You decided to keep your handgun. The police come to your door. Are you going to shoot them? What are you going to do when SWAT shows up? Lets say an entire town refuses this law and the national guard is sent in. Are you going to shoot your fellow Americans?

How far would you go over a gun that is now by law illegal to own making you a criminal.


There is no need to go to crazy scenarios because already the scenario is real in the usa and the only reason we still have arms is because we still have arms.



posted on Nov, 14 2015 @ 09:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: stolencar18

Paying for an education is one thing, what's going on in most universities is something else entirely. People are being given debts that they can NEVER repay and they can't even declare bankruptcy on them. There would be a whole lot less complaining about free education if two things were true:
1. The cost of an education in any way reflected the market value of that education.
2. They were treated the same as every other debt.

Job requirements keep going up, to make $15/hour now you need a bachelors degree and that's rapidly approaching a masters degree. Spending $150,000 to jump from $10/hour to $15/hour is not a good deal but people believe they should be able to pursue jobs they would like to do. People who goto college don't want to be cashiers their entire lives, they want to be doctors, scientists, engineers, artists, designers, marketers, and many other professions. The system however is set up that this is not possible. The way it works now is you graduate college, get stuck in an entry level job, and 10 years later you're still there while your education/skills have atrophied and you still have almost as much debt as when you started thanks to interest. People see this happening and they want it changed, and frankly they're 100% right to want it changed.


You do not need a degree to make $15 an hour. That's ridiculous and completely false. As far as the cost of university goes, you forget that these people CHOOSE which universities to attend (Ivy League vs state university vs local college), they choose where to attend school, and they choose to go into debt to pay for an education path that they chose.

Nobody is forcing this on them.

Your statements that the "system" is set up to stop job progression is bull. Lots of people work their way through college and come out debt free, or with manageable debt loads.

People are 100% wrong to want this changed. What's next? Demanding that 4 bedroom, 3 bathroom houses be given for 10 grand? You know, because you NEED a house, because the system is rigged. Right?

Pure silliness.



posted on Nov, 15 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: stolencar18
You do not need a degree to make $15 an hour. That's ridiculous and completely false. As far as the cost of university goes, you forget that these people CHOOSE which universities to attend (Ivy League vs state university vs local college), they choose where to attend school, and they choose to go into debt to pay for an education path that they chose.


Because the opposite choice is to get a no skill job where you're never going to have any real kind of life.


Your statements that the "system" is set up to stop job progression is bull. Lots of people work their way through college and come out debt free, or with manageable debt loads.


Millions go through school, some will come out ok. If that were the case for most though, then student loan debt wouldn't be entirely concentrated on one generation and it wouldn't be larger than our credit card debt.


People are 100% wrong to want this changed. What's next? Demanding that 4 bedroom, 3 bathroom houses be given for 10 grand? You know, because you NEED a house, because the system is rigged. Right?


Actually, most people in my generation don't think we'll ever own a home. We'll never be able to afford one, student loan debt or not.



posted on Nov, 16 2015 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

With all due respect, your generation - likely the same as mine - needs to hike up their shorts and quit whining.

Student loan debt doesn't exceed all credit card debt. Not even close. That's a blatant lie. Using your hero's #'s, Keely Mullen figured there's 1.3 trillion in student loan debt in the US. A quick google search showed several reputable sites showing total American credit card debt at 3+ trillion dollars.


And having a no-skill job and no life? Good effing grief...Work for a living and earn an honest days pay and make your own way. A "life" - meaning a social life, free time to play Xbox, drinking nights, etc - is not a right you have. The problem is there is no work ethic anymore. Everyone thinks they deserve a $15 dollar an hour job for doing no work. And the crying about having no options? Bull. There's lots of physical labor type jobs that pay well over $20. Look harder. They're out there.

And college? If you choose that route, you don't need an Ivy league university to get a successful career afterwards. Sure, it's fun to attend the big name school with a friend, but is it smart? Maybe not. Most employers don't care what school you attend as long as you finish it. Sure, some care, but who cares. MOST don't demand Harvard grads. Finally, people paying tens of thousands for courses without researching what kind of income they can earn afterwards? That's their own fault.

The point is...

Take some personal responsibility instead of demanding that the world bail you out. You don't have a right to a job, to income, to a house, to be debt-free, to university, or a certain lifestyle. Those are privileges.

Ya..I'm mad. These people are selfish and lazy and I'm sick of people who want something for nothing.
edit on 16-11-2015 by stolencar18 because: because



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join