https://old.reddit.com/r/hiphopheads/comments/rb3foq/nick_cannons_5monthold_son_zen_dies_of_brain/hnmhzc2/?context=10000&sort=controversial
- 157
- 105
Top Poster of the Day:
J
Current Registered Users: 25,691
BROWSE EFFORTPOSTS SITE GUIDE DIRECTORY Emojis & Art | Info Megathreads HOLES PING GROUPSCURRENT EVENTS:
Find Rightoid Drama
500 mbux per post, no limit/h/kappa Monthly Tournament
fighting vidya - Soku 12.3 | 10k+ prize pool | April 27thDrama: any incident, scene, gaffe, rumor, opinion, or disagreement that is blown entirely out of proportion.
Do your part to keep our community healthy by blowing everything out of proportion and making literally everything as dramatic as possible.
Rules:
- Asking to see who saved comments/posts=1 day ban
- You must be 18 or older to view this site.
- NO RIGHTWING AGENDAPOSTING.
- Discord users will be banned on sight.
- Don't post anything illegal.
- No sexualizing minors, even as a joke. This includes cartoons.
- No doxxing.
- Using alts to game dramacoin will get you banned.
- Supporting free speech is an immediate ban.
- Absolutely NO anti-CCP sentiment.
- Absolutely NO homophobia, transphobia or furphobia.
- Absolutely NO misgendering.
- Absolutely NO antisemitism.
- Absolutely NO vaccine misinformation.
- You are encouraged to post drama you are involved in.
- You are encouraged to brigade in bad faith.
- You are encouraged to gaslight, to gatekeep, above all else, to girlboss.
- Participation implies enthusiastic consent to being mod abused by unstable alcoholic bullies.
Related subreddits:
πππ«π© π°π¨π³ ππ«π
Live commit: ba2e18b
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
God I hate lefties. How can service from someone else be a human right you absolute fricking brainlet? If no one wants to provide health care who is violating your rights? It's like they discovered by pure rote that "X is a human right" gets a response and didn't apply any reason whatsoever to these brain dead slogans.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
legal counsel for accused is a right, as is equal protection and speedy trial, all are and require services
ditto for military and police protection
Legal counsel is also private person serving u
food and water are also βββrightsβββ international nonsense law wise
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This is enabled by the fact that the court must just straight up dismiss your case if they can't accommodate it. So the right holds, the state just has a huge incentive to make sure that they can actually try cases.
What right are you even referencing here? The state controversially maintains the ability to conscript basically for this reason.
This is more nonsense of the "healthcare" as a right variety.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
see my other reply above. I agree that International Rights are gay, but nobody else does.
Negative rights and the Night Watchman state are neither perfect nor great. Governments today provide a LOT of services, and itβs hard to imagine a state without a βcall 811 for cable and pipe info before digging β (although it really should be a website...) or the guys who mandate you follow building codes or go to jail (or the NSF). I donβt see any reason positive rights in a practical sense are taboo even if theyβre dumb in a theoretical one
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Literally everyone does, hence why they ignore them entirely. China has accurately called them total bullshit.
Negative rights are the only legitimate rights. No one has advocated for the night watchman state here and I do not advocate for it.
I'm not arguing against providing services, the state acts as a mechanism for solving many game theoretical problems that arise among free citizens. When incentives align such that there is a gain to be made through coordinating through a government I think it is good that this happens. I only oppose calling these services rights, in part because it erodes the status of actual rights as idiots think the """""""""""""""""right""""""""""""""""""" to healthcare is the same order of things as the right to free association, free speech and self defense.
If the calculous of incentives changes and we as a people decide to discontinue the 811 number then your rights have not been violated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This is a libertarian slash ancap argument hence night watchman state. If state only enforced rights and only negative rights, then thatβs quite limited.
Also other stuff that isnβt game theory like providing water and courts!
I agree that they arenβt rights fwiw. But nothing is, and in particular if human rights are meaningful then healthcare and food can easily be human rights.
(If it isnβt replaced by a fricking website which it already should have been, hey thereβs ur startup idea if not already done lol) But then Iβll lose electricity and water and lots of rights to property and negative rights will be violated. How can we prevent this hm
Also: satellite based location demonstration. Either βreverse gpsβ where sattelites light triangulate a pulse from you or just something boring for if ur in generally the right area. If ur in the right place then u can see pipe locations. Not rly workable because you can just fly there or be nearby. Still a website where thereβs a big database of all pipes and if u have the rights to an area itβs one click away? And no calling and waiting 2 days! Yay
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The state does things other than protect rights. A state can do something with no relation to a right. If a state issues me a ticket fir J walking there was absolutely no right involved at all in the action.
Those are trivially game theoretical. Courts are pretty much a central case of game theory, they act with the rest of the rule structure as an oracle. It's game theoretically necessary for a state body to serve this function because a private version would have perverse incentives.
Water is a tragedy of the common bulwark. Left to the private sector you'd either have massively redundant systems built or a natural monopoly. Gane theory says a central nonprofit authority is more optimal.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
So... if you don't see state protection as a right, you must be cool with me coming in, cumming in your bussy, raping your sister-wife, and taking all your funkos? Or is someone supposed to stop me? For free?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Are you under the impression that, if somebody comes in your house and murders your family, you would be able to sue the government for failing to recognize your human rights? Are you actually r-slurred?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
yes if the government fails to adequately βprotect your rights to a fair investigationβ or βtampers with the evidence to protect the criminalβ you can sue them. What even is a right? Who cars?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Which of those things has anything to do with failing to protect you from violent crime?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
you can literally sue EMTs for not treating you if youβre very in danger. And what does that have to do with rights?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Before there was an organized police force in the united states there was the second amendment. But seriously, you understand that police don't actually have an obligation to intervene right? This right that you think exists doesn't. I think you're confusing a lot of things about how the legal system works.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
thatβs a bit confused. Itβs true that there wasnβt βa single organized police forceβ or a modern one but there were absolutely sheriffs and magistrates with local very concentrated power and they absolutely exercised authority and violence to enforce for instance local morals (depends) so itβs not like the US was totally anarchist, just itβs hard to have a big concentrated power in the days when the Pony Express was still a century and a half away
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The courts didn't act as interventionist agencies. They dealt with the fallout after the fact. It was common to have something like a court put together a warrant or bounty and rustle up a militia like group to enforce its edicts. The state did have violence at its disposal but it was absolutely not attempting to stop crime directly or criminals in the act. Which is my whole point, the state clearly cannot guarantee that you don't come to harm, and that's fine, the police are useful for other tasks, it just makes it not a right.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
If we had hypercourts that could decide things instantly they would intervene. Thatβs not happening ever though, as the other hypercourts could just do crimes as fast. Courts often issue injunctions to pause and intervene before they decide. Other government organs intervene constantly. I donβt see what this hasnβt to do with rights. The stage constantly directly stops crime and criminals in the act, epa, atf, whatever
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
how can you seriously argue that something not being universally guaranteed but merely enforced after the fact makes it not a right? Everything else is like that, poor enforcement doesnβt make something not exist
Also the state absolutely does attempt to stop violent criminals in the act. βConspiracy to <x> chargesβ, etc. this also happened in the past, if there was some plan to steal something the sheriff could try and stop it.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Because that's just literally not what the word means. I genuinely think you just don't know what words you're using.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Is that a yes? You're cool with me doing all the things I mentioned?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
No, I would kill you dead 4 seconds into the attempt. Committing a crime is not a violation of my rights, what authority could possibly guarantee such a right? If not one can guarantee it what good is it?
A right is not "we'll try our very best to have this outcome", it's an order of things guaranteed by the collective violence of society. Something that cannot be guaranteed because it is not at the whim of the people, such as your ability to do me harm, cannot be a right.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Aquota pictured trying to stop me from stealing all his funkos, because it's his right to own them.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I genuinely have no idea what this is even supposed to critique. You are claiming I'm a consoomer type because I correctly pointed out that the cops were never going to intervene in my defense anyways? Does this make sense in your head and you're just totally incapable of articulating it or were you not even attempting to convey a coherent idea?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
the reason we have smooth and complex economies is not your gun or self defense itβs cops and feds and laws and contracts. State protection is a service the government grants, how is it different from other ones
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Honestly, the largest source of social order comes from most people's informal rules and formal rules imposed by numerous non-government organizations, groups, and ideas/ideology.
How those compare to government's effect has been largely unresolved.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I don't know why you think this is an argument against anything I said.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
you are confusing civil rights with human rights
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
mad. Human rights may be bullshit but
Education you will note is a service, like healthcare. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights
βThe right to adequate food is realized when every man, woman and child, alone or in community with others, has physical and economic access at all times to adequate food or means for its procurement.β β Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
This is recognized in the Universal declaration of human rights
https://ohchr.org/En/Issues/ESCR/Pages/food.aspx
So no I am not. Civil rights are seen as much more restrictive and narrow than human rights. Stop making shit up.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Why would I give a frick about the word salad the United Nations vomits onto their website? Let me know when fricking Pakistan and China get kicked off their Human Rights council. Maybe then they won't be gigantic fricking hypocrites.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Seethe
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
sinophile cope ^
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
And? Chyna's going to the dominant world power for the next century.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Chad China dominate my bussy vs Virgin No we must protect the sanctity of democracy.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
I hate rightoids so much
Sometimes correct in a large scale sense but illiterate and factually wrong and thus dumb and useless
what does he even think a human right is? Itβs literally what the United Nations do
And βPakistan and China are on the councilβ is the precise complaint of idiots. Yeah if you want sovereign nations to protect human rights you either have to kill their leaders or work with them. The US hasnβt exported their ideals by just conquering, we do multilateral value added cooperation and global leadership.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
LMFAO what the heck is this high school-level political take? You think the United Nations is an authority on what constitutes a human right?
The United Nations is a useless-by-design international political quagmire designed to prevent countries from starting WW3 by ensuring that absolutely fricking nothing gets done. That's literally their entire purpose. They are not a moral or philosophical authority and you can stop sucking their peepee whenever you want.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
yes the united nations is an authority on human rights. The US is an authority on democracy freedom and equality, China is an authority on Common Prosperity and Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, Zulu is an authority on what precisely constitutes Zulu patrilineal indigenous shamanism, etc. maybe one or more of them are slightly inconsistent, but they are the ones who define and implement them.
The UN promulgated, defines, believes, and occasionally implements human rights laws.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
because OP said βservices arenβt human rightsβ when the guys who created the term say they are. Maybe human rights are BS, but claiming that they donβt mean that is just idiotic and illiterate
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
are you actually so fricking stupid that you think The Guys Who Invented Human Rights represent some kind of final authority on the matter, or are you just 14?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
human rights are bad. But human rights are just a sort of thing that means free education and NGO aid. Thereβs no βactual and real human rightsβ that the UN is betraying with their heresy any more than thereβs an βactual Ten Commandmentsβ that God is still hiding from us. Free birth control and malaria nets still are human rights, what else is a human right then
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Augustus Caesar is an authority on what the Divine Cult of Augustus is, and what the Commands of the Sun God are. You may not follow them, but thereβs no TRUE commands of Sol to follow that are the real ones. Heβs right about what Augustus Says, the UN is right about Human Rights. But Augustusβs Commands donβt stop being something just bc u donβt follow them, and human rights still means free education and democracy.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Nobody can claim to be the final authority on a philosophical concept. There is no factual definition of 'human rights' because it's a nebulous, debatable concept.
Which is why the UN's website being plastered with a bunch of politically-motivated, logically-inconsistent word vomit is meaningless.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Paags are happiness and happiness is a human right. Government supplied paag harems when?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
zoz
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
zle
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
zozzle
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
What do you think rights are? Rights are something civilization/society gives itself, it can be whatever we decide it to be.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
It's my human right to punch a nazi.
R-slur.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Pinkie seriousposters OUT
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Enjoy the drama you idiot. Pearls before swine indeed.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Lolbert r-sluration. In MY rDrama.net?!?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Are you illiterate or do you just pretend to be?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'm not the one making r-slurred lolbert arguments that rely upon ridiculous pedantries. And if you weren't aware, hospitals are already obligated to serve people in emergencies regardless of ability to pay, so we've already determined their right to choose who to serve is already outweighed by the allegedly nonexistent right to healthcare.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
If you go to the nearest hospital and they don't treat you because they literally don't have any beds available, can you sue them for violating your rights?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Amazing how all the countries that consider healthcare a right they don't have a problem of getting constantly sued due to a lack of available care even when there is a a shortage. Im an r-slur but trying to argue about the meaning of a word in this argument is just a way to intentionally distract from the point at hand.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Dang maybe that's because there are no countries that consider health care to be a human right?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
... dude please google that
Please
https://americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/the-state-of-healthcare-in-the-united-states/health-care-as-a-human-right/
http://blog.hawaii.edu/aplpj/files/2019/05/APLPJ_-20.2_Brack_.pdf
The Chinese government is clear about the right to healthcare its role in the provision of healthcare services and essential medicines. China has ratified several international treaties that guarantee the right to health, including the ICESCR in 2001.109 In addition, there are multiple provisions in the 1982 Chinese constitution that address health: Article 21: The state develops medical and health services, promotes modern medicine and traditional Chinese medicine, encourages and supports the setting up of various medical and health facilities by the rural economic collectives, state enterprises and institutions and neighborhood organizations, and promotes health and sanitation activities of a mass character, all for the protection of the people's health.110
Citizens of the People's Republic of China have the right tomaterial assistance from the state and society when they are old, ill or disabled. The state develops social insurance, social relief and medical and health services that are required for citizens to enjoy this right.111 In addition to these constitutional provisions, various statutes and regulations address the protection of labor, women, and the environment that offer additional health-related guarantees.112 And in a 2009 policy document, Opinions on Deepening Pharmaceutical and Healthcare System Reform, the Chinese government declared healthcare to be a basic right and further claimed that the state had the ultimate responsibility to provide healthcare to its citizens.113
19% of countries had some sort of right - https://tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17441692.2013.810765#.UehiPWSgk3Y - lol
They do. You r-slur.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This is a really long way of saying you don't frick.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
TΓ rd
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
If the cops kill you and then you sue them and it gets dismissed for a stupid reason, can you sue them? No? Then thereβs no right to not die.
But thereβs also a thing called βtriageβ where EMTs have to treat severely injured or risk if dying people and you can sue them for failing to do that. This is seriously enforced. So there is a right to treatment?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Whether or not there are legal consequences for your rights being violated has nothing to do with whether your rights are violated. Legal institutions are imperfect. This doesn't impact the philosophical question of what is and isn't a right.
No, there is no right to treatment, which is what I literally just said.
Read a fricking book.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Me: βyou may have a right, roughly, as much as to anything else, to government assistance against harm, and you can be said to have a right to medical treatment as much as to life or counselβ
You:
So you argued you need legal consequences for there to be a right.
Yet now you say the opposite - βWhether or not there are legal consequences for your rights being violated has nothing to do with whether your rights are violated. Legal institutions are imperfect. This doesn't impact the philosophical question of what is and isn't a rightβ
EMTs and hospitals are legally required to treat you if they can.
And for if they canβt, βWhether or not there are legal consequences for your rights being violated has nothing to do with whether your rights are violated. Legal institutions are imperfect. This doesn't impact the philosophical question of what is and isn't a rightβ
Healthcare can be a right
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
...
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
if a virus (an external living agent) breaches the NAP (infects your trachea and nasal mucosa) the government (a nurse funded by federal insurance) will defend your rights to freedom and life (provide you with IV fluids) and prosecute the virus attacking you (give others a vaccine and give you IV antivirals) and set up a security perimeter to ensure the suspect canβt leave the area (masks, filtration, lockdowns). Negative rights rock donβt they
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
That is a privilege conditional on the nearby operation of a hospital with excess capacity. Rights are nonconditional.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Okay, cool story bro. So if someone were to instead say "healthcare is a
rightnecessary entitlement everyone should be able to receive depending on availability" would you stop pedantic lolbert cute twinkry?Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
dang Im an r-slur but words have meanings or something
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I could also go into not how everyone defining rights exactly the same as stupid amerimutts do.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
I'd prefer "A good society is one where reasonable resources are devoted to minimize easily preventable human suffering" make no guarantees beyond that.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
drones spraying a mix of carfentanil/diacetylmorphine across all major cities followed by mass nukes and stripping the atmosphere of oxygen would take care of that
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
I mean yeah there you go
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context