IS and OUGHT

[Harbal]

If you were overpowered and leashed, treated as property: is this wrong?

It would be very wrong as far as I was concerned, and I would do what I could to get out of that situation.

If nobody else thought it was wrong I would be left to deal with the problem on my own.

[henry quirk]

These inalienable rights, impossible to question change or update in any way,

Not unlike everything else that is real.

Fire, for example, can't be updated. It is what it is. And it is what it is whether anyone likes it or not.

Same question, flash: Do you really believe your life is not your own?

[Harbal]

Moral fact or amoral drive, this absolutely universal notion of I am mine can inform what is permissible between and among men. When one recognizes and respects the other as havin' the same right to his life, liberty, and property, what can go wrong?

Exactly, the drive is within you. It is not given to you.

[henry quirk]

It would be very wrong as far as I was concerned, and I would do what I could to get out of that situation.

Yes, and everyone else thinks the same thing: It would be wrong to leash me and I'll escape when or if I can.

Even the slaver thinks this.

If nobody else thought it was wrong I would be left to deal with the problem on my own.

Oh, there's a whole whack of folks who'll leash you, but not a one of them will willingly accept the leash.

Every one, any one, knows he is his own.

[henry quirk]

Whether this knowing is built into him by The Creator or is simply some peculiarly specific survival trait, is irrelevant, I think.

I don't agree. You offer a weird and restrictive set of rights that is entirely directed at your own preferences. It would suit you to set these arbitrary limits and have no need to explain them, but what you don't have for that is ... any right at all.

It's funny how knowing you have a right to your life, liberty, and property and knowing the other guy has a right to his life, liberty, and property, and knowing neither of you have a claim on the other is weird & restrictive to you.

It's almost like sayin' if I can't put a leash on my neighbor I'm bein' oppressed! Or if my neighbor can't put a leah on me he's bein' oppressed!

[henry quirk]

Moral fact or amoral drive, this absolutely universal notion of I am mine can inform what is permissible between and among men. When one recognizes and respects the other as havin' the same right to his life, liberty, and property, what can go wrong?

Exactly, the drive is within you. It is not given to you.

It's in everyone.

And as it's in everyone -- as moral reality or amoral survival trait -- it can undergird an ethical system of is & ought.

Really, is there anyone here who objects to the idea that he is a free man with a right to his, and no other's, life, liberty, and property?

[FlashDangerpants]

These inalienable rights, impossible to question change or update in any way,

Not unlike everything else that is real.

Fire, for example, can't be updated. It is what it is. And it is what it is whether anyone likes it or not.

Same question, flash: Do you really believe your life is not your own?

I have never disputed that people by their nature all want autonomy. I am disputing the bullshit notion that you can or must limit rights to some set that you derive from this.

You hae the right to be treated in accord with the gender that you know yourself to be, and nobody has the right to tell Henry that he is not a he because he knows himself to be a he... no? You don't grant any right of autonomy to other people in this matter because you don't agree with them, so you carve youself out a right to overrule them.

[henry quirk]

I have never disputed that people by their nature all want autonomy. I am disputing the bullshit notion that you can or must limit rights to some set that you derive from this.

Where is the limit in flash is a free man with a right to his life, liberty, and property; Henry is a free man with a right to his life liberty and property; neither have any claim on the other?

It's there, minimal & sensible. It is: flash doesn't get to do diddly with another's life, liberty, and property; Henry doesn't get to do diddly with another's life, liberty, and property.

*

You hae the right to be treated in accord with the gender that you know yourself to be, and nobody has the right to tell Henry that he is not a he because he knows himself to be a he... no?

No, you have a right to define yourself as you like becuz it's your life, your liberty, your property. You don't have a right to compel my agreement or my understanding or my association with you. My life, liberty, and property are mine.

*

You don't grant any right of autonomy to other people in this matter because you don't agree with them, so you carve youself out a right to overrule them.

As I say, have said many times: if you pretend, or actually, as a man, believe you're a woman, that's no skin offa my nose. It's none of my business. What is my business is when you demand I acknowledge you're a woman, cuz you're not. You get to do with yourself as you please; I get to do with myself as I please.

Neither of us has a claim on the other's life.

*

you carve youself out a right to overrule them.

There's nuthin' in your life, liberty, and property is yours; my life, liberty, and property is mine; neither of us have a claim on the other that overrules you pretendn' or believin' you, as a man, are a woman.

*

nobody has the right to tell Henry that he is not a he because he knows himself to be a he... no?

That's the skepdick argument. As I am a guy -- been one since before I was born; will be one right up to my death in a cat house -- yes, it would irksome to be called a girl. Do you have right to address me as Miss? You do. And I have a right to not associate with you. I don't have a right to compel you to address me as Sir.

[Belinda]

Henry Quirk wrote:

What is my business is when you demand I acknowledge you're a woman, cuz you're not. You get to do with yourself as you please; I get to do with myself as I please.

How could you know who is a woman and who is a man?

[henry quirk]

Henry Quirk wrote:

What is my business is when you demand I acknowledge you're a woman, cuz you're not. You get to do with yourself as you please; I get to do with myself as I please.

How could you know who is a woman and who is a man?

If we're talkin' about Tula, the model...

99FBCA4A-68AB-4622-9C62-883E20267364.jpeg (93.98 KiB) Viewed 439 times

...it ain't gonna come up. But this...

3174DD9C-8560-4B31-A77E-03F83E134EC2.jpeg (87.06 KiB) Viewed 439 times

...might lead to conversation.

[henry quirk]

Henry Quirk wrote:

What is my business is when you demand I acknowledge you're a woman, cuz you're not. You get to do with yourself as you please; I get to do with myself as I please.

How could you know who is a woman and who is a man?

That fella in that video I posted in another thread, the irate guy, remember?

He's a guy.

[Sculptor]

Really, is there anyone here who objects to the idea that he is a free man with a right to his, and no other's, life, liberty, and property?

ROFL
You rather shot yourself in the foot there.
What a joker!

[henry quirk]

Really, is there anyone here who objects to the idea that he is a free man with a right to his, and no other's, life, liberty, and property?

ROFL
You rather shot yourself in the foot there.
What a joker!

Explain why there's a hole in my foot.

[FlashDangerpants]

I have never disputed that people by their nature all want autonomy. I am disputing the bullshit notion that you can or must limit rights to some set that you derive from this.

Where is the limit in flash is a free man with a right to his life, liberty, and property; Henry is a free man with a right to his life liberty and property; neither have any claim on the other?

It's there, minimal & sensible. It is: flash doesn't get to do diddly with another's life, liberty, and property; Henry doesn't get to do diddly with another's life, liberty, and property.

If you aren't going to explain how this right is created, backed, granted and so on ... which you claim doesn't matter...

Whether this knowing is built into him by The Creator or is simply some peculiarly specific survival trait, is irrelevant, I think.

... Then you have no way to deonstrate additional shit. Things under the heading of additional shit include that this is the only right. Or that only rights that derive from this are "real". Nor even that this is some primary right that must not be overridden for any other right.

Your work is lazy and bad.

[Belinda]

Henry Quirk wrote:

What is my business is when you demand I acknowledge you're a woman, cuz you're not. You get to do with yourself as you please; I get to do with myself as I please.

How could you know who is a woman and who is a man?

If we're talkin' about Tula, the model...99FBCA4A-68AB-4622-9C62-883E20267364.jpeg...it ain't gonna come up. But this...3174DD9C-8560-4B31-A77E-03F83E134EC2.jpeg...might lead to conversation.

Yes, facial hair and much much more. In a free country I may grow facial hair if I so choose. Neither you, nor the Prime Minister, nor the Pope in Rome is going to dictate to me what I choose to be designated as. You are so traditional in a dictatorial fashion that you come across as a paradigm case of male chauvinism.