Flying Squid@lemmy.world to People Twitter@sh.itjust.works · 2 年前We don't earn it.lemmy.worldimagemessage-square132linkfedilinkarrow-up11.17Karrow-down143
arrow-up11.13Karrow-down1imageWe don't earn it.lemmy.worldFlying Squid@lemmy.world to People Twitter@sh.itjust.works · 2 年前message-square132linkfedilink
minus-squareFlying Squid@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down1·2 年前 No one, neither me nor you has an inalienable right to be alive I mean… The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (plus, you know, murder laws) may disagree with you. But have fun with your libertarianism.
minus-squareUmmdustry@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down2·2 年前Ok, prosecute all eight billion of us for the murder of the seventy million that died last year, see how that works out for you.
minus-squareUmmdustry@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down2·2 年前Positive Vs. Negative rights, we’ve been talking about it this entire time. Saying “You can’t murder him” is different from “You can’t let him die”
minus-squareFlying Squid@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up4·2 年前Again- Universal Declaration on Human Rights. It cannot be any clearer. I’ll even show you the relevant article. It’s very concise: Maybe you are not in one of the 48 of 58 UN member states in existence at the time that voted in favor of it. Note that there were no votes against it. If so, I’m sorry your country does not care about basic human rights.
minus-squareUmmdustry@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down2·2 年前Then why does the UN let 60 million people die each year?
minus-squareFlying Squid@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up4·2 年前Are you seriously asking why the UN is unable to defy biological and medical science?
minus-squareUmmdustry@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down2·2 年前Yes (but only rhetorically, I’m actually asking why you belive that some hypothetical future institution will be able to)
minus-squareFlying Squid@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 年前I don’t? You seem to think that ‘right to life’ means ‘right to defy entropy.’ It doesn’t. I guess freedom speech isn’t a right because people in comas don’t have that ability?
I mean… The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (plus, you know, murder laws) may disagree with you. But have fun with your libertarianism.
Ok, prosecute all eight billion of us for the murder of the seventy million that died last year, see how that works out for you.
What are you even talking about now?
Positive Vs. Negative rights, we’ve been talking about it this entire time. Saying “You can’t murder him” is different from “You can’t let him die”
Again- Universal Declaration on Human Rights. It cannot be any clearer. I’ll even show you the relevant article. It’s very concise:
Maybe you are not in one of the 48 of 58 UN member states in existence at the time that voted in favor of it. Note that there were no votes against it.
If so, I’m sorry your country does not care about basic human rights.
Then why does the UN let 60 million people die each year?
Are you seriously asking why the UN is unable to defy biological and medical science?
Yes
(but only rhetorically, I’m actually asking why you belive that some hypothetical future institution will be able to)
I don’t?
You seem to think that ‘right to life’ means ‘right to defy entropy.’ It doesn’t.
I guess freedom speech isn’t a right because people in comas don’t have that ability?