Equal Rights

[Gaybaby94]

I just edited my signature to include something I thought of. Lets use this example. Sally has 1 cookie. Sam has 5. Sally feels she is oppressed and wishes for the cookies to be distributed equally. When Sally confronts Sam on this, Sam whines and cries because his cookies are being taken away in order for there to be equal treatment. Thats what I see a lot in the oppressors of equal rights.

In order for human rights to be equal, some rights must be taken away from the oppressors in order for rights to be given to the oppressed. Another example would be free speech and gay bashing. Obviously gay bashing is not included in the first amendment and should never be. Now the oppressed see this as their right to free speech as being taken away.

So what do you think about that quote? Do you think some rights of the oppressors must be taken in order for equal rights to be achieved?

[Jupiter]

this is a bad example, tbh. just cuz sam has more cookies than sally doesn't mean he needs to share.

knowing you and your posts, i'm assuming you're speaking on gay marriage. what rights need to be taken away to give the right for gay marriage. really.

[Professional Russian]

I think your suggesting communism. atleast with the cookies example you are...

[StoppingTime]

>Complains about something someone feels is unfair
>Get Whatever you want because you complained.


This is basically what you're suggesting, and I don't really see how that could ever work.

[PerpetualImperfexion]

What you're suggesting is scary. People have the right to say whatever they want as long as it does not damage someone else's reputation (slander is a very gray area).
If someone doesn't like gays they have every right to voice that opinion. Some people will probably tell them what they think of their ideas, but there should be no legal action taken against them.
In a dictatorship if someone says something bad about the dictator they are punished. Already I've been called racist because I don't like Obama. The reality is I don't like how he runs the country, it has nothing to do with the color of his skin. Never the less if the first amendment wasn't there I could very easily be thrown in prison.
In all honesty, you're suggesting removing the first amendment from the constitution or creating a law that directly contradicts it. Ridiculous.

EDIT: In your cookie example you are suggesting communism. On paper, yes communism seems like the best idea ever. In reality though someone has to be in charge. This someone is greedy, non-elected government. Because they have near limitless power they take away rights and steal people's money. If your cookie example takes place in China, both of them would get 1 cookie and the rest would be taken away. Mean while they would be working for the government to produce 100 cookies an hour. China is successful because the people are slaves.

EDIT(Again): Actually, yes, gay bashing is included in the first amendment.

[Manjusri]

Sally seems lazy and greedy to me. How do we know sam didn't work twice as hard for his 5 cookies as sally did for 1? You can't use a broad example like that as a basis for a government, there are too many other variables.

While first amendment might not specifically say "Gay bashing is legal", it also doesn't specify that it is illegal. There's a difference between freedom of speech and slander. Just like any other amendment, there are ways around it.

I think it's funny the way you classify "oppressors" and "the oppressed". No one is getting oppressed. What you're implying is that any of a higher class should divide their wealth to those who don't have as much (implied in the cookie example). That's ridiculous. What if someone works for everything they have earned and become wealthy, they should have to give their wealth to those who are lazy?

Dividing wealth from those of a higher class to those of a lower class is deviating from equal rights more than supporting them. It's showing that one class will have to give up what they have earned, while the other class is able to leech from those earnings while doing little to nothing. Let's have one person work really hard, and then have the other person get a portion of their income regardless of whether or not they're employed, in school, etc. Makes perfect sense, totally equal.

[Human]

I don't understand what you're saying, if the boy has earned these 5 cookies, then why should he be forced to share them with the girl? I don't know what you're saying really, you need a better example.
What rights would you take from the 'gay bashers'? Free speech?

[Taryn98]

Idealism sounds great on paper, but in practice it doesn't work. When reality sets in, everyone in this example loses.

[Sugaree]

I just edited my signature to include something I thought of. Lets use this example. Sally has 1 cookie. Sam has 5. Sally feels she is oppressed and wishes for the cookies to be distributed equally. When Sally confronts Sam on this, Sam whines and cries because his cookies are being taken away in order for there to be equal treatment. Thats what I see a lot in the oppressors of equal rights.

In order for human rights to be equal, some rights must be taken away from the oppressors in order for rights to be given to the oppressed. Another example would be free speech and gay bashing. Obviously gay bashing is not included in the first amendment and should never be. Now the oppressed see this as their right to free speech as being taken away.

So what do you think about that quote? Do you think some rights of the oppressors must be taken in order for equal rights to be achieved?

I think it's pretty fucking oppressive to take away the rights of anyone, whether you agree with what they say or not. How do you justify taking away the rights of one to give it to someone else? It's a morally "right" thing to make sure everyone is equal, and everyone is equal by definition. So how can you make someone less equal by taking away their right to voice their dissent? It's not right, it's just as oppressive.

For equal rights to be achieved, stop trying to legislate it. The more laws that are passed, more opposition comes out. The issue here is to quit legislating what we believe to be morally right, be it denying gay marriage or allowing it. This goes for a variety of issues, and we see that political correctness is the result of these laws being made.

I think your suggesting communism. atleast with the cookies example you are...

This is wrong too. It's not Communism. If it were Communism, the cookies would just be taken away from both children.

[Professional Russian]

This is wrong too. It's not Communism. If it were Communism, the cookies would just be taken away from both children.

Wait i thought communism was the distribution of wealth and shit equally?

[anyone50]

Your example smacks of Socialism and taking away from some to distribute to others so everyone has the same has nothing to do with equal rights. What rights are you actually talking about?

[PerpetualImperfexion]

Wait i thought communism was the distribution of wealth and shit equally?
On paper, yes, but in reality everyone loses except the government.

[Sugaree]

Wait i thought communism was the distribution of wealth and shit equally?

On paper: distributing everything to everyone so each person has a fair share.

In practice: taking the majority of the money from everyone so everyone can be poor.

[Professional Russian]

OK I got you guys now. Either way what the op is saying still doesn't work.

[Cicero]

So even then it's not equal. Because you're taking away another persons rights. It's still free speech, just how you use free speech to bash religion.


FYI to everyone, Gaybaby94 has rarely responded to people who disagree with him.

[FreeFall]

Do you have like a whole bunch of socks? Or money? Do you have more than one dollar?

I have only 1 pair of socks right now because I'm lazy and left my other pairs laying around. And I spent all my money so I only have 23 cents. So, my life sucks, I'm clearly being oppressed by the world, and you have more than me so.... GIMME ALL YOUR SOCKS AND MONEY SO I CAN HAVE MY EQUALITY I DESERVE NOW.

[Lost in the Echo]

Well, about the cookie situation, Sam shouldn't be forced to distribute the cookies equally, because those are his, they belong to him.
I really don't get how that cookie situation and equal rights have any correlation to each other, in this comparison.

Also, I really don't see how any rights would need taken away, for there to be equal rights.
The LGBT community is making great progress in earning equal rights. It's only a matter of time until everyone is treated fairly.

[workingatperfect]

Your cookie example has absolute nothing to do with what you said about equal rights.

A better example for what you're trying to say would be that when slaves were freed, white men lost their right to own slaves. See, in your example, you're giving Sally the right to someone else's property. In my example, I'm giving slaves one their natural rights, of which they have done nothing to forfeit.

Now, as far as gay bashing, the first amendment only protects your freedom of speech as long as you aren't jeopardizing any other citizen's rights or reputation (falsely). As soon as you cross that line, your right to free speech is gone. Their rights aren't being taken away, they're just over-stepping the boundaries of that right.

Your cookie example is moot because Sally doesn't have a right to Sam's cookies, so her rights aren't being protected by giving her two of Sam's cookies. The point you're trying to get across is that rights are being taken away from one person, in order for another person's to be protected.

Also, as a side note, that example is showing neither communism nor socialism. Idealistically, in communism the 6 cookies would be "collectively owned" and distributed by a central organization according to each person's needs. In other words, Sam wouldn't be giving up his own cookies, because they weren't explicitly his to begin with. He has a right only to what he needs.
In socialism, if Sam had more cookies than Sally it's because his production efforts at work outweighed Sally's. He worked harder, he gets more cookies.

[Twilly F. Sniper]

That example only encourages socialism.
Sally apparently is trying to encourage a socialist type division of the cookies.
Sam is just being greedy.