60% of those younger than 30 say the main cause of the ACW was States Rights

[Valmy]

No legal constructs like "rights" or "powers" are inherent.

The entire basis of our country is that they are inherent.

[Razgovory]

I seriously question this.  There were more small land owners here then in Europe, and they were certainly better off then their old world brethren, but it was still a rough job with irregular income.  Factory work in the US often gave decent pay that was delivered on time for easier and less dangerous work.  We often forget that before tractors were common farm labor was really hard work not to mention dangerous.  I had a great aunt who was widowed 8 times due to farm accidents.

I'm not convinced a 19th century farm is more dangerous than a 19th century factory.

Don't want to pick on you, but there is a difference.  Powers can be removed without due process.  Rights can not.

Says who?

I was taught the difference between rights and powers was that powers are delegated and rights are inherent. Powers would then be delegated rights.

No legal constructs like "rights" or "powers" are inherent.

Says who?  Says the constitution.  Government powers can be removed with a stroke of a pen.  Individual rights cannot be so easily removed.

[grumbler]

No legal constructs like "rights" or "powers" are inherent.

The entire basis of our country is that they are inherent.

Also, that rights are not legal constructs.

[Razgovory]

If Raz and Grumbler are on the same side of an argument, who can stand against?

[OttoVonBismarck]

The entire basis of our country is that they are inherent.

Explain what practical effect that has versus them being legal constructs. If they are inherent, does that mean there is some way that I can inherently know exactly what rights I have? Or what they specifically entitle me to do? How do I know what my inherent rights are, and what their parameters are?

[Neil]

Your country is based on a lie then.

[Eddie Teach]

If Raz and Grumbler are on the same side of an argument, who can stand against?

Often Grumbler and Raz. Raz because he's crazy and grumbler because it's frequently hard to pin down exactly what he's arguing. 

[Razgovory]

The entire basis of our country is that they are inherent.

Explain what practical effect that has versus them being legal constructs. If they are inherent, does that mean there is some way that I can inherently know exactly what rights I have? Or what they specifically entitle me to do? How do I know what my inherent rights are, and what their parameters are?

The practical effect is that you can exercise these rights without a government.  If there were no government you'd still have these rights.  Governments can't grant these rights, they can only protect or take them away.  They are inherent in a person.  A power is a construct, a government has to create a power.

[The Brain]

If Raz and Grumbler are on the same side of an argument, who can stand against?

Often Grumbler and Raz. Raz because he's crazy and grumbler because it's frequently hard to pin down exactly what he's arguing. 

"One is a moron, the other's insane..."

[OttoVonBismarck]

The practical effect is that you can exercise these rights without a government.  If there were no government you'd still have these rights.  Governments can't grant these rights, they can only protect or take them away.  They are inherent in a person.  A power is a construct, a government has to create a power.

Give me an example of one of these rights I can exercise without a government and how I would go about exercising it.

[PDH]

OvB is a Hobbesian.

[Admiral Yi]

He's right.  A right is meaningless unless you have a state that can coerce protection or respect for the right is universally internalized in the population.

[Razgovory]

The practical effect is that you can exercise these rights without a government.  If there were no government you'd still have these rights.  Governments can't grant these rights, they can only protect or take them away.  They are inherent in a person.  A power is a construct, a government has to create a power.

Give me an example of one of these rights I can exercise without a government and how I would go about exercising it.

Freedom of speech.  You can stand on an unclaimed island and scream your head off.

[OttoVonBismarck]

So to exercise these rights I need to be on an unclaimed and presumably uninhabited island? Humans are social animals by nature, what do I do if more realistically I live with or near other people and one of them informs me he will kill me if I say certain things that offend him?

[Razgovory]

So to exercise these rights I need to be on an unclaimed and presumably uninhabited island? Humans are social animals by nature, what do I do if more realistically I live with or near other people and one of them informs me he will kill me if I say certain things that offend him?

No, the unclaimed island is an example of a place without government (there aren't really many places on Earth without governments so examples tend to be odd).  The fact you can exercise the rights without a government means government does not grant them.  They are inherent.  Keeping people from killing you is protecting a right, not granting a right.