jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (14 posts)

Should be the Bill of Privileges Not the Bill Of Rights!

  1. road2hell profile image74
    road2hellposted 6 years ago

    I don't get this notion of everyone has rights.  There are several problems with this philosophy. One -- If you have "the right", then you must be right and thus doesn't need to be accountable to noone, including society.  Two -- everyone will try to make a law that suits them regardless what others think.  Soon, you have many different laws for many different situations.  Making laws to please everyone doesn't work. 

    Privileges means you deserve to be in that situation because you are accountable and you earn it.  However, if you abuse it, you lose it.

    Privileges are a fairer way to look at life and the law should be based on it,  not rights.

    1. paradigmsearch profile image91
      paradigmsearchposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Privileges are granted by someone else. You want someone else to tell you what you can and cannot do?

      Come to think of it, you are right. The Bill of Rights is already the Bill of Privileges.

      Never mind...

    2. John Holden profile image59
      John Holdenposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      A bit of confusion here! A right and being right are two totally unconnected states, having a right does not always mean that you are right and being right does not always give you the right.

      That beside I do have a certain amount of sympathy with the OPs opinion.
      Too many people get rights and privileges mixed up, how often have you heard people say "it's my right to drive down this road"?
      Driving isn't a right, it's a privilege.
      How many more privileges do people claim as rights?

    3. psycheskinner profile image81
      psycheskinnerposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      The point is that we have the duty to treat other people with a basic level of respect no matter how much of an idiot they are.  "Rights" is just a way to encode *our* duty to treat others humanely--and to indicate that this duty *is not* conditional or optional for a civilized person.

  2. Cagsil profile image61
    Cagsilposted 6 years ago

    WOW! roll

  3. JBBlack profile image61
    JBBlackposted 6 years ago

    no.  Bill of rights plz.

  4. road2hell profile image74
    road2hellposted 6 years ago

    If feel that unless you are ready to pay the consequences for your actions, you can't be consider a citizen.  Of course, if you do right and respects the law and others, you should be rewarded.

    Civilizations failed because their "citizens" do not respect the laws that govern their behavior that would be consider to be acceptable.

    1. Cagsil profile image61
      Cagsilposted 6 years agoin reply to this


    2. profile image0
      Emile Rposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      That would fall under the heading of innocent until proven guilty. You have the right to all privileges the law can afford the citizen, until such time as you are found guilty of breaking the law. Your rights begin to change at that moment.

      1. road2hell profile image74
        road2hellposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Er... Criminals seem to have rights!

      2. profile image0
        Emile Rposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        You may have a little more faith in the good will of governments. I would prefer to err on the side of caution when considering what liberties to remove.

        I doubt it would be much easier to control us all if we had to pass a test in order to secure what we know consider inalienable rights. The criminals would still be the criminals. You and I would simply be less free, because I can assure you; if you give government free reign to tinker they'll take all of your freedoms away.

  5. JBBlack profile image61
    JBBlackposted 6 years ago

    People in prison lose some of their rights.  Convicted felons have to wait 8 years after being released to petition for their right to vote.  But to remove all rights for naughty people, illegal aliens,, and whatever other groups you might want to see added to the list would fundamentally corrupt the most noble of American characteristics: the rule of law.

  6. road2hell profile image74
    road2hellposted 6 years ago

    Good Point.  Privileges you can lose, but rights seem to be fautless way of saying i can never lose.  Sometime to do with power, maybe?

  7. SpanStar profile image60
    SpanStarposted 6 years ago

    It sounds like pretty much like people are close to the target regarding Rights and  Privileges however I think I want to align myself with these 3,  paradigmsearch, John Holden, Emile R

    As someone here already stated a privilege can be taken away from you but having the Right- I Have The Right To Say You Can't Come Into My House Without A Warrant  ( Not Supose To ), I have the Right To walk down the street without being stop or held against my will for doing nothing.  I have the Right to a phone call.  If these were privileges then other decide if they'll allow it.