File: 1646662354783.png (743.04 KB, 651x951)
Human Rights
03/07/22(Mon)19:17:10
No.54762
Shared:
philosophy
Might just be me thinking about the Lefties I interact with day-to-day, but why are people so obsessed with whinging about "basic human rights," yet there's always a group that they think deserves to die or worse?>>briyoh4s⇸
Even Christians, thought they are supposed to practice forgiveness, only hold peace in their mind by thinking about how the worst people are going to Hell. Atheists, on the other hand, have a more barbaric view on the issue; they believe child rapists and animal abusers should deserved to be raped (or worse) to death. The ones that I have found that don't like things such as the death penalty usually don't because they're either religious (see above), or the people they believe are the worst people on Earth aren't doing things that are technically illegal/they're too rich or powerful to get punished.
While I've struggled to maintain this line, human rights still exists in my mind as an important thing to grant to all humans, yet this is the one inconsistency that every demographic seems to be fine bearing. It makes me feel like human rights don't actually matter to them and it upsets me.
>>54762
do you want to be the one to give serial child rapists rights?
>>54763
It's more a situation of not doing so results in horrible implications. If I do give everyone rights (including serial child rapists) and I get assassinated afterwards, let the record be known that humans probably don't deserve rights.
>>54762
In an ordered society there is a baseline level of safety. This is known colloquially as "human rights". Calls for others to respect their rights are then seen as enlightened. By acknowledging this; fringe groups who skirt the taboos or do not apply may try to change the rules to benefit them. So begins a cat and mouse game driven by necessity.
Farmers were slaves to their lord. Until they were able to supply more than their lord deemed necessary. Suddenly farmers were allowed to petition for incremental privileges that in turn became rights. Now they were citizens instead of subjects and the land they tended was theirs, not the king's.
Those with rights try to protect and expand them. If their lowers can produce an excess then perhaps those enlightened individuals, touched by god himself, may deem them worthy to vie for an increased bread ration.
Rape is a horrible thing. Murder is a horrible thing. Indentured servitude is a horrible thing.
Especially for those who are protected from those things.
They cannot fathom themselves being wronged. It's illegal after all. However if they think of miners pressed into forced labor for electronics manufacture, they will dismiss it as a simply statement of fact. Something completely natural. Perhaps when rare earth mining is automated they will start an online petition.
But fact is slavery common. So much so that victims are more numerous than those of the whole of the Atlantic Slave Trade.
As for your question as to why some groups are hyperfixated on this issue, the answer should be as plain as the nose on your face. If they can wrest control of the conversation from those who wish to obtain rights, they are now free to use it as cudgel. A club to brain any group that conflicts with them.
You are certainly free to subscribe to the idea that rights should be universal. Good on you for having the decency to be consistent.
File: contemplation.png (490.58 KB, 530x530)
>>54770
I understand what your saying, and even sympathize to an extent. The main thing bothering me is the implication it forces upon the hypocrites: What are we to think of people that use human rights as a cudgel to put others down in their own interests?
While I understand why the Right utilize these tactics (though I sympathize with their plight, I don't agree with their methods), it would seem that the Left do so because they see the groups they side with as disenfranchised because they are not parity with the successful people. This would be understandable if it weren't in favor of people they don't even align with biologically (e.g., white women to blacks); at least if they sided with the weak and were weak themselves, it would be because they believe they are treated unfairly because of their circumstances.
How are blacks worthy of protection but racists are not believed to deserve the same opportunities? It could probably be its own discussion (often considered alongside Extra Credit's Orc video), but it seems like the Left believe that ideas are in no way tied to biology, and if they are, that they are justified in discriminating against "majority" people that hold those ideas. It makes me think the traitors of one's kin ought to be purged, and being an outsider both genetically and psychologically, that terrifies me.
>>54773
I think you would find it better to consider that:
A. most people do not follow their line of reasoning(s) to their logical end
B. Actual moral people are rare.
>>59568>most people do not follow their line of reasoning(s) to their logical endThey don’t? Well, that’s unfortunate to know. Now I feel like I was the only fool trying to find the logical ends.>Actual moral people are rare.I doubt that. PERFECTLY moral humans? Almost nonexistent. Moral humans that are either slaves to their emotions or moral humans more interested in their view of justice than what is more universally and/or objectively considered justice? Much more common.