'Natural rights' are Enlightenment mythology and left-wing clap-trap.


Is that a fact, or a prejudice?


Equality, inborn claims, the 'nature of man' as an abstract universal.


Is that a fact, or an opinion or belief?

I will bite.
First off Natural rights are a concept not something that exists. Tell the lion that you have them.
Natural Rights are great for promoting that a king's right to govern is wrong or a repulics right to screw you is wrong.
At best "rights" are a way for things to get along. It might be the best way but it is still just a concept.
"rights" only exist based on the power of the masses to stop the controlling minority from preventing them.

Concepts are integral to human civilization, and their use and application to human interaction is what separates us from animals. So, to say they aren't really real is not saying much of anything at all. No, they don't exist outside our minds in some concrete form, but then, neither do our minds exist tangibly, they are an epiphenominon of our physical existence. So, the fact that rights are conceptual, only exist in our minds, and are thus made real only by human interaction does not render them "mythology" in any way.

Read The Law by Frederic Bastiat


"Life, faculties, production--in other words, individuality, liberty, property -- this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it.

Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place."

What Is Law ?

What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

Each of us has a natural right--from God--to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any
one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties?

If every person has the right to defend -- even by force -- his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right -- its reason for existing, its lawfulness -- is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force -- for the same reason -- cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.

So if lions made laws we could say they had rights that pre-exist those laws also? And bad laws also show natural rights such as the law not to feed peanuts to elephants in church? Enough said on that line of logic.
No, laws I think were made to force others to abide by them.

You sound like you are ok with humans being manipulated just as lions. If people are ignorant then they are not a human being as I understand your point.
I guess by your tone that anyone who defends their right to others property is human but wrong. A non-human has no right unless stated and a human who defends has a right as they state.
You seem pissed that humans don't state thier right. I guess that you want what you state but are not human enough to defend what you think those rights are without enough backing.
I'm making a logical deduction based on your last post. If you are angry but are waiting for others then by your post you are not human unless you restate your premise differently.

Henny, you didn't even make an argument. I can quote 18th century writers all day, too. Ones far above Bastiat's philosophical rigor.

But I don't care. Morality is so retarded it's not even worth discussing. Have your religious bullshit, see if God and your Rights stop thieves and shotgun shells. Then you might find out that what is 'right' is what is 'right' for whoever has the power to enforce it.

I agree, good and evil do not exist. There is no such thing as morality and there's no such thing as immorality. Problem solved, case closed.

And lets not forget right and wrong. According to you, they don't exist either.