XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.computer.workshop   
   From: x@y.com   
      
   >Rights are behaviours that do not have to be explained. If the state   
   >says concealed weapons are legal under the Second that is the end of the   
   >matter. Same shit for brains say we are only free to say nice things   
   >about ICEstapo.   
      
   I would respectfully disagree.   
      
   A human right has two necessary properties:   
      
   1) A human right is intrinsic to the human experience.  A human right   
   is not granted by a government and, therefore, cannot be limited by   
   one.  Not all governments recognize human rights; however, they exist   
   anyway.  This means that it does not matter whether or not your   
   government recognizes the right, as soon as your feet are on US soil,   
   you have that right... and have always had it.  It does not matter   
   whether you cleared customs at Reagan National, swam the river, or   
   were barfed up on a California beach by a whale... if it's a human   
   right, you have it.   
      
   2) A human right is indelible.  It cannot be removed or restricted by   
   a government for any reason.  (Remember that the government isn't the   
   giver of human rights.)  For example: we practice freedom of   
   theological belief (or the lack thereof) as a human right.  This means   
   that there is no crime so heinous, no abomination so foul, such that   
   you could be sentenced to Catholicism... or prohibited from it.   
      
   Human rights are usually ratified in that *most* societies agree on   
   and practice a common set of human rights.  (I did NOT say "all"!)   
      
   A question: If one agrees with my set of properties of human rights,   
   are guns practiced as human rights in the United States?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)