Last night republicans in Wisconsin were successful in passing a bill which in part strips unions of so-called collective bargaining “rights”.  I’m not in favor of unions as they have become nothing but political tools used to stir up violence and be the protestors on-call for the democrats.  Now aside that one of my problems with liberalism is they believe just about everything is a “right” of some sort.

Cell phones are a right.

  • iPads are a right.
  • Cable TV is a right.
  • High-speed internet is a right.

The list goes on and on.

A great part of this comes from the victim and entitlement mentality of the left who think the government should provide for them.  However, what exactly is a right to you?  In the workplace I think you have a right not to be discriminated against, but collective bargaining is not a right at all. 

I have plenty of examples of what I think, but I pose this question to you…..

What is the difference between a right and a privilege?


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Mar 28, 2011

Leauki
I do not need a licence just to drive a car, only to drive a car on public roads. I bought a large farm and drive my car on my own road.

But you do need insurance.  Another requirement, that means it is not a right.

Leauki
I do not need insurance to drive my car on my road.

Yes you do.  Perhaps not in Ireland, but you do in most states here.  It is the law.  Rights being naturally endowed, are not restricted by laws (at least here).

Leauki
No agreement was ever made between me and anyone about my driving on my farm.

If you have never lost your privilege to drive, you can buy a scooter (defined by law as a motorcycle that does not exceed 35mph) to your hearts contect.  However if you have lost your privilege to drive, you no longer can drive the moped.  Same as your farm equipment.  As all things, you can do it illegally, but you cannot do it legally.  Rights you do legally every day.  Privileges you are allowed to do.

on Mar 29, 2011

I don't know which part of the constitution would allow the US government to make laws that could stop me from driving my car on my own land. I still think driving a car is a right. If the US government disagrees, I wonder on what basis they do.

on Mar 29, 2011

Leauki
I don't know which part of the constitution would allow the US government to make laws that could stop me from driving my car on my own land. I still think driving a car is a right. If the US government disagrees, I wonder on what basis they do.

Just ask nancy Pelosi (are you serious?).  They find justification for new laws all the time - the latest is forcing you to be a consumer of a product they do not offer.

on Apr 04, 2011

Leauki
I don't know which part of the constitution would allow the US government to make laws that could stop me from driving my car on my own land. I still think driving a car is a right. If the US government disagrees, I wonder on what basis they do.

Actually, what you refer to in driving your car on your land are private property rights. As long as you stick to your private property you have the right to do as you like, within reason. Once you leave your property and drive on the roadways, your private property rights cease with regard to your vehicle.

If it were a right you would not need to be licensed to do so, nor could the government revoke said license for infractions. A right can not be revoked, but a privilege can be.  There is nothing in the Federal or state constitutions that establishes a right to operate a motor vehicle.

2 Pages1 2