Rights talk has many times caused me to think. There is much silliness
here. Obviously, each 'right' is in fact nothing more than a special
sort of privilege having two important attributes. One, the privilege is
asserted by the beneficiary or by some benefactor. Two, either the
beneficiary or the benefactor must then attempt to secure the privilege
by force or threat of force. People can and do imagine that 'rights' are
more complex than that but they are not. If i go walking naked though
the jungle and i come upon a hungry tiger does the tiger have the right
to eat me? We can watch the tiger assert and secure. If on my naked
nature walk i am accessorized with an AK-47 do i have the right to punch
poor tygy-wygy full of holes rather than trust that he will not make a
meal of me? As was alluded to in the previous post: Rights talk is
violence talk--thems just fightn words.

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.516 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/1/2003


---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>