What exactly are rights? So much is being said about them and there is talk that we in the UK, the government, might actually define them. To be honest that scares me. It seems we have done so well without one for the last several hundred years that only lately with Gordos lot have we actually any need for one and he thinks he is best placed to create one. You see I don’t trust this lot as far as a three week old baby could throw them and at the moment the favourites for being our next elected leaders look just as bad as I think that any definition that comes from any of them would need to be completely rewritten from scratch.
You see they think that by making their wish list rights it suddenly becomes a right and something that will automatically happen. Watching what is going on in the US regarding their rights is interesting as they confuse rights written in the constitution with rights defend by the messiah. The constitution a very sensible document written by some very sensible people to combat the tyranny of the British government has been weakened over the intervening years to try and remove those rights because with them a tyrannical government is by no means certain to win. People in the US swear an oath to the constitution not the government and although the government has the army it is by no means certain that it can order it to subdue US citizens in contravention of the constitution. The messiahs rights on the other hand are more like a wish list and depends on the force available to the government.
I see our government’s rights, being socialist scum, not being any different. Plus it would have many items in it disguised as rights but with enslave us to state control by imposing on us rights such as the right to pay taxes. The right to have something given to you means that someone else is paying for it. That infringes on their rights.
Rights in my opinion should not require someone else to do anything but are dependant on you not infringing anyone else’s rights. You do that and you lose your rights. For example try and steal something from me means I get to steal from you. Some of your life, maybe all of it, and/or some of your property. Your rights are ignored to repair my rights that you infringed. So basically rights are things that are not infringed by anyone else, including the government without a trial by jury. 12 good men and all that and any laws in place can’t infringe on them either. Thus;
You have the right to life and freedom to go and do what you want if you can afford it.
You have the right to own any property you can afford to buy and do what you want with it.
Errr… I’m sure I could think of more but maybe I’m not so good at actually defining rights. There are plenty out there that are though and if it was independently discussed publicly, reviewed by the public when issued and a referendum was held then that would be good.
Of course the above doesn’t cover what your responsibilities would have to be. Pay taxes for the (very) small state for defence, police, roads etc. but not any of the million and one programs we do now. However, I see those being outside a rights discussion. They are part of the changes we need to make to the state via legislation and can, and will, be changed without constitutional changes.
But lets get it right. Basically we have experts on constitutional law, we have places where a constitution is in place we could pick and choose from a working constitution, the US for example, or create a new one based on what we have had in place for a couple of centuries now. Modify a bit to bring up to date and make sure ye olde language doesn’t cause confusion to those dim witted socialists. Add in a few updates such as recall and execution of politicians that just won’t leave when they have screwed up and we want them to just fuck off.
Up to now we have not needed one as we all had rights, albeit not defined in stone, but recognised rights. Corrupt politicians have eroded them because they were not written so we need something defined now but not by politicians. Not by the people that actually caused this mess. They couldn’t organise the rules in a crèche.
I’m no constitutional expert but I don’t have to be. You consult on recommendations, discuss them until you are happy. Define them in a nice easy to read, non lawyer, document and then publish it as a straw man. Then you get feedback which is discussed and answered openly and then you republish another draft. Repeat until everyone is happy. Hold a referendum and away we go. If they are interested I’ll negotiate the fee and it’ll be much cheaper than the report on home schooling and significantly less biased.
What are Rights anyway?
What exactly are rights? So much is being said about them and there is talk that we in the UK, the government, might actually define them. To be honest that scares me. It seems we have done so well without one for the last several hundred years that only lately with Gordos lot have we actually any need for one and he thinks he is best placed to create one. You see I don’t trust this lot as far as a three week old baby could throw them and at the moment the favourites for being our next elected leaders look just as bad as I think that any definition that comes from any of them would need to be completely rewritten from scratch.
You see they think that by making their wish list rights it suddenly becomes a right and something that will automatically happen. Watching what is going on in the US regarding their rights is interesting as they confuse rights written in the constitution with rights defend by the messiah. The constitution a very sensible document written by some very sensible people to combat the tyranny of the British government has been weakened over the intervening years to try and remove those rights because with them a tyrannical government is by no means certain to win. People in the US swear an oath to the constitution not the government and although the government has the army it is by no means certain that it can order it to subdue US citizens in contravention of the constitution. The messiahs rights on the other hand are more like a wish list and depends on the force available to the government.
I see our government’s rights, being socialist scum, not being any different. Plus it would have many items in it disguised as rights but with enslave us to state control by imposing on us rights such as the right to pay taxes. The right to have something given to you means that someone else is paying for it. That infringes on their rights.
Rights in my opinion should not require someone else to do anything but are dependant on you not infringing anyone else’s rights. You do that and you lose your rights. For example try and steal something from me means I get to steal from you. Some of your life, maybe all of it, and/or some of your property. Your rights are ignored to repair my rights that you infringed. So basically rights are things that are not infringed by anyone else, including the government without a trial by jury. 12 good men and all that and any laws in place can’t infringe on them either. Thus;
You have the right to life and freedom to go and do what you want if you can afford it.
You have the right to own any property you can afford to buy and do what you want with it.
Errr… I’m sure I could think of more but maybe I’m not so good at actually defining rights. There are plenty out there that are though and if it was independently discussed publicly, reviewed by the public when issued and a referendum was held then that would be good.
Of course the above doesn’t cover what your responsibilities would have to be. Pay taxes for the (very) small state for defence, police, roads etc. but not any of the million and one programs we do now. However, I see those being outside a rights discussion. They are part of the changes we need to make to the state via legislation and can, and will, be changed without constitutional changes.
But lets get it right. Basically we have experts on constitutional law, we have places where a constitution is in place we could pick and choose from a working constitution, the US for example, or create a new one based on what we have had in place for a couple of centuries now. Modify a bit to bring up to date and make sure ye olde language doesn’t cause confusion to those dim witted socialists. Add in a few updates such as recall and execution of politicians that just won’t leave when they have screwed up and we want them to just fuck off.
Up to now we have not needed one as we all had rights, albeit not defined in stone, but recognised rights. Corrupt politicians have eroded them because they were not written so we need something defined now but not by politicians. Not by the people that actually caused this mess. They couldn’t organise the rules in a crèche.
I’m no constitutional expert but I don’t have to be. You consult on recommendations, discuss them until you are happy. Define them in a nice easy to read, non lawyer, document and then publish it as a straw man. Then you get feedback which is discussed and answered openly and then you republish another draft. Repeat until everyone is happy. Hold a referendum and away we go. If they are interested I’ll negotiate the fee and it’ll be much cheaper than the report on home schooling and significantly less biased.