Actually quite arguable

Post #72,540 by JayMehaffey 1/4/03 5:56:54 PM Reply	Actually quite arguable Even if we make the assumption that by citizens you mean everybody that lives in that territory, it's still arguable if the US really passes. On point one, we sorta make the grade right now, but are activly breaking down as we speak. The rich, politically connected and companies all have more rights then the general population and the situation is getting worse. On point two, we can pass only if you go for a narrow definition of basic rights. If you take things like the right to shelter, food, and such to be basic rights then we fail. As for point three, we will find out if that part of the system still works in a few years. And personally, I would also add a free press to the list of key ingredients. Without a free press the people won't know enough to have any idea who they should be supporting. In that regards the US is still fairly good but media mergers and rating wars are activly eroding it also. Jay
Post #72,554 by boxley 1/4/03 6:43:23 PM Reply	right to shelter food? There is and should not be a right to shelter and food. If you are hungry get food, you want to sleep inside get shelter. If you cannot provide it for yourself do not expect the collective to assist you. Me, if I need it I take it. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] You think that you can trust the government to look after your rights? ask an Indian
Post #72,592 by JayMehaffey 1/4/03 11:11:04 PM Reply	Re: right to shelter food? Actually I think claiming either of those things goes to far also. What I was trying to point out tought, is that what is and what is not a basic right is a complex and open question. Take the right to bear arms, the right to have privacy, the right to live without government interference, or the right to medical care. There are lots of things that people claim as rights or claim are not rights. Why some and not others? The way you put the question made it seem that you where taking the rights we have in the US as being the basic rights, making the statement that the US meets those requirments a bit of circular logic. If you want to judge if the US meets the requirements of supporting basic rights, you need to better define what they are. Jay
Post #72,596 by boxley 1/4/03 11:16:55 PM Reply	As defined by the bill of rights and ammendments to the constitution. In America anyway. Any rights not implicitly granted by the feds or the states are held by the people. However the crux comes when rights held by the people(individually) are requested by preassure groups to be paid for collectively by the government. This is where all social conflict in America comes from. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] You think that you can trust the government to look after your rights? ask an Indian

Welcome to IWETHEY!