631
submitted 1 year ago by grte@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Every right has limits. Discrimination against protected classes is one of those limits.

[-] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 year ago

Every right has limits.

Yeah, that's a good way to get you into a tyrannical situation you have no way out of.

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Name a right you think has no limitation.

I'll find your limits (if you're honest, which, given this is the Internet, is highly doubtful).

Here's a foretaste:

"The pursuit of happiness…"

If my happiness involves making other people miserable, well, either you're a fucking sociopath for supporting it, or there is an intrinsic limit: "…provided you don't interfere with the happiness of others." And with that one safe-seeming limit, we open a can of worms in defining just the word "interfere" there.

Still want to play this game?

[-] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

All of them. Any that have any sort of limitation imposed upon the user by anyone automatically turns that right into a privilege granted to you by other people, and by extension easily removable by others at any time for any dumbass arbitrary reason.

I know you're going to say this means all rights are privileges. And you're right. We don't have any rights. We need them but don't have them. This is how humanity has chosen to carry itself through this life, and the future. We lost the plot on rights a long time ago and we might not ever get them back.

“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.” ― H.L. Mencken

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Say you didn't read and/or understand the post you're responding to without using those specific words.

[-] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 year ago

Say you didn't understand what I was saying without saying those specific words

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

I understood what you were saying. It was just 100% unrelated to what I said. Next time respond to what's written before you, not to the voices in your head.

[-] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz -1 points 1 year ago

Lol okay, tell yourself that. You're the one getting your panties in a twist because you're angry you're embarrassing yourself. Calm down and then come back and re-read everything.

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Dude, you clearly either didn't read or didn't understand my example. Come back when the voices in your head stop telling you what I actually said and when you address what's actually written, OK? Until then, take your meds and see your shrink.

this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
631 points (92.0% liked)

Canada

7106 readers
375 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Regions


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social & Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS