Re:[OT]Governments was: [FT] UNSC (emotional rant), etc etc etc.. .

Mark A. Siefert wrote:
>
> Contract?  I don't remember signing any contract.

Your parents signed it for you when you were born here. You're free
to re-negotiate, of course, but don't expect it to be easy...

> As realistically as you put it, I'm not sure I can 100% agree with
> you. To say that people only can claim a right as long as they have
> the power to back it up, is to say...oh... that a totalitirarian
> power has every "right" to opress a population.  Why not?  Rights
> don't really exist unless the population has the strength to back
> them up. In other words:  Might makes right, yes?

No, the relationship is more direct: Might = Right.

When you say you have the right to do something, like freedom of speech,
for example, you're saying you have the power to speak freely.
This power (and others) is granted to you by the laws of the USA, and
enforced by the legal system, and ultimately guaranteed by force of arms
(i.e. the policeman's gun). Here's how I see it:

What if someone wanted to interfere with my power to speak freely?
I'd take him to court, and the judge would tell him to stop, and maybe
punish him for interfering.
What if he ignored the judge?
The judge would tell the police to arrest him.
What if he ignored the police?
They would use force.

If my power to speak freely is not guaranteed by the society I live in,
then I don't have the right to freedom of speech. They're one and the
same.

> There has to be a point where an individual can put their foot down
> and tell the groups and governments of the world that they don't have
> the power to interfere with their lives, regardless of what kind of
> power they wield, on a moral basis.

Or else what? Are there any consequences if they don't stop interfering
with my life? They DO have the power to interfere, until I (or someone
else) prevent them from doing it.

-- Rick "Bulletproof" Rutherford