Human rights have been taken to exist in the USA based on the value of individual humans to a creating being. The existence of these rights has been said to exist externally to human hierarchies and human-derived values placed on other humans. These rights exist naturally: Natural Human Rights. A Natural Human Right is an absence of restriction, a freedom, irrevocable.
The concept of Natural Human Rights was a departure from the old idea of Natural Law (1). Under Natural Law, all rights were subordinate to the laws of a sovereign. Evolution is a complement of Natural Law; it is natural that the strongest, best adapted, most aggressive will out-survive and dominate the lessers. There is no right to survival much less a right to anything else. It is no accident that Darwin’s triumph is named “On The Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection, Or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”. The struggle for life is Natural Law: tooth and claw. (2)
Under Natural Law the strongest in physical strength, most perseverant in will, keenest in cleverness, etc., are the ones who assert control and dominance over the lessers. Any rights the lessers might be allowed are allowed courtesy of the dominants. There is no supernatural or moral value attached to these gratuitous rights, which may be removed in an instant.
The secular drive to provide abortion-on-demand as birth control is called a right. But it is not an external right, it is a right conferred under Natural Law. The dominants will impose a right that goes directly in opposition to the concepts of traditional externally derived rights, such as the right to life. So it is that Natural Law supercedes Natural Rights.
So by the imposition of abortion-on-demand, the rule of Natural Law is allowed to succeed that of law based on externally derived rights. This is the doorway to complete reign of Natural Law. When Natural Law conflicts with externally derived rights, the original rights will be eliminated, as the new, secular, rights under Natural Law are installed.
The second area of rights being conferred by Natural Law is the idea that certain population segments should have more protection than other population segments. This amounts to the institution of segregation that will come of “Hate Crime” (thought crime) laws and "Fairness" (broadcast elimination) laws. These will be used to silence certain population segments and favor other population segments. The idea of a large, powerful national police force is a natural projection of Natural Law.
These new secular rights invented under the dominance of Natural Law include the right not to be offended by differing viewpoints (supercedes free speech); the right to absolute equal broadcast time for all viewpoints (supercedes free speech); the right to have their crime against me treated much more severely than my crime against them (supercedes equal protection under the law). As seen in Canada, due process under the law is superceded by tribunal inquisitors with the ability to punish the offending segments without recourse to normal legal protections. Watch for this to occur in the USA next.
Because there are no remaining absolute morals against which to measure an alleged crime, the use of Natural Law allows the dominants to use their own definitions of rights to first restrict, then punish, and finally eliminate the opposition.
But Natural Law has a flaw; the dominant must be ever vigilant or the opposition might overwhelm them. Natural Law has been the ruling law of the European fiefdoms for eons. It results in feudalism and entrenched encampments enduring endless skirmishes… unless it is done in a very big way.
The huge “socialist” and “scientific socialist” seizures of power in the early 20th century were a return to Natural Law, despite any lofty ideals that were espoused. Rights were no longer externally derived, they were determined by a core of Atheist dominants. And the dominants had abandoned all semblance of externally derived morality and had defined their own rules for ruling.
This is where the USA is today. Objective morality is no longer an important feature of the culture. Rights are now declared by the dominants, including those in the courts who can define any rights they wish. Natural Law will quickly become the successor of externally-derived rights and laws, and the latter will fade away, if not fought for. But just as the 20th century Natural Law experiments show, the collapse of Natural Law will come ultimately. It’s the interim that will be brutal.
Natural Law: Tooth and Claw.
(1) Natural Law is not here taken to reflect the legal term, which presumes an objective moral basis; here it is taken to mean law of nature, survival, evolution by natural selection.
(2) The idea that Atheist intellectuals now reject “Social Darwinism” in no way falsifies the concept. In fact, if anything it falsifies the Natural Selection concept itself. The idea that “morals evolved” is a stop-gap story created under the pressure to preserve evolution from its obvious paradoxes. To say that morals evolved to help man get along together, and then observe that “men do not get along together so MY MORALS must be implemented”, is absurd.
2 comments:
Stan,
Obama has already said that the constitution is flawed because "that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf."
Obama believes in some form of positive rights. When the state starts to do things on ones behalf, even for their own good, it eventually turns to abuses over time.
Yes, I had forgotten about that. I had never even considered the possibility of liberties being negative. It seems to me that only a totalitarian would do so.
We are entering dangerous times.
Post a Comment