Re: PHIL: The flaw in "rights"

Freespeak (
Wed, 28 Apr 1999 22:44:50 -0700

(12) For a right to be valid its exercise may not impose a positive obligation on another; it only depends on others not taking coercive actions. Free Sovereign Citizens respect the equal rights of other Citizens, and therefore do not expect others to contribute to their interests, except through voluntary transactions or contributions.

>From the Terra Libra Code <>.

Frederick Mann

At 11:45 PM 4/28/99 -0500, "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <> wrote:
>The UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has
>a right to food, clothing, and education. "Rights" apply only between
>person and person, not between person and Nature. I can have a "right"
>for you not to punch me in the nose; I can't have a "right" to eat a
>meal. Maybe I have the "right" to take your meal away from you and eat
>it, but if that's what they meant, they should have said so.
>I don't know if anyone has phrased it that way before, but it strikes me
>as being a clean logical-plane counter to an unfortunate way of
>thinking, so I thought I'd share it.

Best Freedom Site on the Web - <>.
Freedom/Liberty Portal - <>.
International Libertarian Network, USA Coordinator -

Freedom & Financial Independence Lists -