Los Angeles mayor promising to violate human rights.

[Elegiac]

No, just look at western countries. Social stability is a major issue in a lot of those countries. Why?

Domestic economic inequality and the lingering results of an informal caste system based on skin color as applied in the West's many colonies. Both of which exist in direct opposition to human rights.

You don't seem to get that socialists and even Marxists exist in Western countries, hun.

Because the individual has rights and freedoms to cause disturbances.

No, this is horse shit spread by authoritarian governments to silence dissent.

Why? Because of cultural mores. Act like many do in the USA and you would find yourself in prison here and that's a good thing instead of allowing them to destabilize society.

What exactly is the point of keeping a stable society if not to furnish human welfare?

Well fun fact, hun, mass incarceration is the exact opposite of furnishing human welfare. It's literally saying "human welfare is too hard, it's easier to just toss them in a cage" - that's not 'communal', that's just depraved.

[Mihalik]

sip.

You are arguing with someone who probably doesn't understand what the word eusocial means (or cares to find out) and whose social philosophy is based on having read a reddit summary of Atlas Shrugged and a few thousand hours worth of podcasts from Tim Pool/Lauren Southern/"Change my mind" Crowder.

[Powerogue]

Their human right to kill people by holding these gatherings in the middle of a pandemic?

Yeah shutting off utilities is harsh but I'd still put that at the end of the list of things to do to people who are actively endangering the lives of everyone around them. You'd take away the driver's license of someone who was drunk driving and endangering people on the street, wouldn't you? Endangering the lives of your fellow humans is bad and should be punished.

edit: Really not sure how the thread got sidetracked into the nuances of what "human rights" mean. As far as I'm concerned, "Endangering the lives of your fellow humans is bad and should be punished." is not a complicated, controversial, or divisive issue that requires a nuanced philosophical discussion.

[cubby]

You don't think water is a human right? I just want that on record.

You don't have a right to water. Utilities can turn them off if you don't pay. That's classified as a priviledge in the U.S. legal system.

Plus, if they want water and don't have utilities at their big law-violating house party, perhaps they can go back to their own homes....

[Doctor Amadeus]

Trump Tear gased non violent protesters and used Nazi tactics to kidnap and assault protesters in cities he wasn't invited to and asked to leave, thus escalating violence. I think I will over look this.

[Slant]

Los Angeles mayor (Democrat) is vowing to shut off water and power to homes hosting parties or gatherings.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/los-ang...es-gatherings/

The social contract requires state authority to consider the greater good of society. Sometimes human rights have to get limited for that. Prime example: Prisoners that have a lot of human rights suspended for the greater good. Stop thinking in absolutes. Human rights are in conflict with each other all the time and they get limited all the time.

[Very Tired]

You don't think water is a human right? I just want that on record.

Water is not actually a human right. Nor is your utility company violating your so called 'human rights' when they shut it off.

[Xarkan]

Water is not actually a human right. Nor is your utility company violating your so called 'human rights' when they shut it off.

https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/human-rights/

Access to water and sanitation are recognized by the United Nations as human rights, reflecting the fundamental nature of these basics in every person’s life. Lack of access to safe, sufficient and affordable water, sanitation and hygiene facilities has a devastating effect on the health, dignity and prosperity of billions of people, and has significant consequences for the realization of other human rights.

The keyword affordable however implies that people have to actually pay for it to get it which is why no rights are violated when it is shut down

However people in a party in LA who has their water shut down still has plenty of access to affordable clean water (just not from their pipes) so that cannot be a real concern

[Very Tired]

https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/human-rights/


The keyword affordable however implies that people have to actually pay for it to get it which is why no rights are violated when it is shut down

However people in a party in LA who has their water shut down still has plenty of access to affordable clean water (just not from their pipes) so that cannot be a real concern

I'm well aware of what the UN believes is a human right, but they are not a governing body and they don't have the ability or authority to enforce these 'rights' for every human on the planet. Ultimately, the UDHR is little more than a list of nice things a group of people thought would be cool if everyone had.

[Xarkan]

I'm well aware of what the UN believes is a human right, but they are not a governing body and they don't have the ability or authority to enforce these 'rights' for every human on the planet. Ultimately, the UDHR is little more than a list of nice things a group of people thought would be cool if everyone had.

Then there are no human rights at all because there are no rights that can or will be enforced universally..

[Very Tired]

Then there are no human rights at all because there are no rights that can or will be enforced universally..

Yep, that's exactly right.

[Slant]

Then there are no human rights at all because there are no rights that can or will be enforced universally..

You are trying to redefine language to win an argument. That is not how it works.

[Xarkan]

You are trying to redefine language to win an argument. That is not how it works.

I have redefined nothing here.. What the f. are you even talking about?

[Slant]

I have redefined nothing here.. What the f. are you even talking about?

Yes, you have. Either that, or you do not understand the most basic thing about human rights. They are not absolutes. Never have been. Your entire premise is wrong. Of course there are human rights. But they cannot, by definition, be enforced universally. They only exist in context.

[Specialka]

Yes, you have. Either that, or you do not understand the most basic thing about human rights. They are not absolutes. Never have been. Your entire premise is wrong. Of course there are human rights. But they cannot, by definition, be enforced universally. They only exist in context.

I guess you misunderstood he was being sarcastics in response of the poster he quoted.

[Xarkan]

Yes, you have. Either that, or you do not understand the most basic thing about human rights. They are not absolutes. Never have been. Your entire premise is wrong. Of course there are human rights. But they cannot, by definition, be enforced universally. They only exist in context.

Read what Specialka said

This sub thread is about Very Tired claiming water is not a human right and when confronted with the UN thinking access to water* is a human right moving on to the un's "rights" pretty much not being real, i was being sarcastic.

*) not unconditionally since they talk about affordable not free for example

[Slant]

Read what Specialka said

This sub thread is about Very Tired claiming water is not a human right and when confronted with the UN thinking access to water* is a human right moving on to the un's "rights" pretty much not being real, i was being sarcastic.

*) not unconditionally since they talk about affordable not free for example

I understood that you were sarcastic. You had no reason to be, though. He is right. The UN charta is meaningless. Human rights are granted by nations individually. They are not "real" in the sense like the law of gravity is real. Maybe I am still not understanding what the discussion is about. But people tend to overthink it and seriously arguing about access to water being a human right means not understanding what human rights are about.

To teach the uneducated here: Human rights are not as much designed to "give" you anything. You're born with life, you're born with dignity (as far as being shat into the world can be dignified, arguably), you're born with an opinion and the ability to express it and so on and so forth. The main purpose of human rights in particular is primarily to protect you from the state curbing you from doing what we consider basic necessities of being a human being.

So, whoever brought this water stuff up clearly went down the wrong road from the onset and anyone discussing with him on his level is helping him along the way. That discussion should have ended on page one.

[infinitemeridian]

The whole argument as to whether it's a human right or not is a red herring. The point is that your government should provide basic access to water for all citizens.

[Kraenen]

The whole argument as to whether it's a human right or not is a red herring. The point is that your government should provide basic access to water for all citizens.

This seems to be directly related. What else are you basing the necessity for the government to provide this service/good?

[Wikko]

Tbh the weirdest thing about this thread is how many of you think having access to water isnt/shouldnt be a human right. Thats the good ol' american education at work there.