One thing I have noticed that I find curious is that most people who I talk to who like to talk about their ‘rights’, rarely talk about the associated responsibilities that come with those rights. They tend to feel that their personal rights some how transcend that of the majority in our society. It’s almost as though their ‘rights’ are some individual thing that comes from a higher authority that are unassailable. I wonder where this idea comes from?
My understanding is that those rights were created, amended, and are safeguarded by the democratic society around us, rather than some inner personal ownership. There are no ‘my rights’ there are a series of collective rights and responsibilities, and it is the various governments, and all of us who vote for them who are the only reason there is a Charter of Rights, and a legal system to protect and enforce them.
Each section of the charter also contains limitations on those rights, and explains when and how they can be superseded or denied. Nothing is an absolute right or freedom, they never have been.
To me there is a social contract between the individual and the safety of the collective, and that contract can change and evolve over time to suit the needs of the group. The idea that we would enshrine behaviours for all time and protect members from ever having to adapt to match the prevailing behaviours seems ludicrous. The right to bear arms in the US is a perfect example of how a poorly written/manipulated document can handicap a society for centuries past the expiry date of the spirit of the passage.
Random musings after a colourful conversation…
