Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawk66
Frankly, your definition of human-rights seem a little strange to me or I just do not get it.
So, for you human-rights are only valid if they do not 'force' others to contribute eg. via public taxes?
|
I simply explained the difference between a 'Right' and a resposibility. I have no right to take from someone if he doesn't feel compelled to give. Doing so makes me a thief, no matter how I try to justify it. Would I steal to feed my family? Certainly. Does that make it my 'Right'? Certainly not.
Quote:
|
So, does that mean if you would have the power, you would stop all government-paid 'forced' welfare systems, even the basic emergency ones ? Or what's the difference ? I have a job and why do I have to pay my taxes for welfare but I can refuse paying for a 'socialist' health care system?
|
Not all. Here in the U.S. we have a dichotomy. What the States can do, I would like to see them do. There can be Federal oversight, but the original plan for our National Government was that it would referee between the States and be in charge of foreign policy. I know that's a slightly different subject, and I'm not convinced I'm right (I never am). I only wanted to point out how I see the term 'Rights'.
Quote:
|
So, a 12 year old boy, who has only a mother, which drinks and is no help for her son: So, this boy should not get a fair chance because we do not want to force the society to help...so just bad luck for him?
|
Yes, he deserves a fair chance. Should you take him into your home? Yes, you should. Do I have the right to force you to raise him and pay his way? No, I don't. Is there a difference between forcing you to raise him and taking some money from everybody to pay for someone else to raise him? If you take money against someone's will, it's stealing. There are two different moral standards at war here, and both are right.