America was founded on the enforcement of natural law, hence the declaration of independence. But slowly the populous has become ignorant of the rights of self-ownership that so many have fought and died for. And quote Jefferson
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Exactly, those only became actual rights in America when the government codified them. Although if you look the founders as British citizens at the time had all the rights granted by the British Bill of Rights, like the right to self defense.
Our bill of rights is derivative of that. America was founded by men who were well read in Enlightenment philosophy.
It is not clear what your stance is, but it sounds like you think rights did not exist until the people who didn't have them fought for them through the form of a government. And are you saying that people fought for rights they didn't know existed until there was government?
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it."
But how did they know they know they had the right to abolish government if it was not granted to them?
Governments are instituted among Men to secure these rights otherwise those rights are not secure. And if they are not secured by your government then you don't have them. If you are wondering where the declaration of independence came from and where the bill of rights came from they were both derivative of this
As far as knowing you have a right to abolish the government.
"If we do not hang together, we shall surely hang separately."
"it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it." Government secures your right to abolish it? Where does this right derive from if not from natural law? Or are you just arguing semantics, that any time two or more people decide to abolish a government they become a government themselves? And that without government, no individual has rights, even if they are willing to defend their right to self-ownership?
If you have two people trapped on an island, one person says they are the government, the other person says they will not be governed. The person who declared self ownership does not have rights, and only the person claiming to be government has rights? If they fight what are they fighting for if not their natural right to self determination, self ownership, self preservation, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, etc?
They knew they were committing treason and that if they failed they would be hung. If you win its a glorious and rightful revolution, if you lose its treason.
without government, no individual has rights, even if they are willing to defend their right to self-ownership.
And where is the place without government?
Think about where your rights really matter, they matter in a court of law, so without a court of law you don't have rights that matter and the only rights that matter are the ones that the court you are in grants you.
In America we have a legal right against warrantless or unreasonable searches, when you exercise that right the cops will inevitably search you anyhow, its in a court where you your right prevents them from using any evidence gathered illegally against you. In other countries you may not have that right, where are you natural rights then?
The kings court did not uphold the rights of the 13 American colonies. So they committed treason, stopping the king from search and seizure of their property, and never went to court for the right to do so. How is it the court of law granted them this right?
The Treaty of Paris is the legal instrument that made it possible.