Agree to an extent, but perhaps not in a "carte blanche" fashion as employed by governments like China

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Only to the extent necessary to protect the rights of the innocent people.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

governments have for sure taken away many rights throughout the years, but sweat shops aren't really taking away anyones rights.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

This becomes dangerous when you apply it to the abortion debate.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

How does that logic work?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Torture is a violation of human rights, correct? My thinking is that if someone (say a terrorist) kills a bunch of civilians and feels no remorse/would do it again, then his rights are suspended because he took the rights (lives) of others (innocents), so the government/military is entitled to torture said terrorist to accomplish a goal or obtain information that would secure the safety and freedom of others.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Oh. You mean deserve.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Unless it's abortion, apparently?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Then it becomes awkward because you could see it as either taking away the right of an innocent foetus to live or taking the away the right of a woman to decide what happens to her body. All kind of unpleasantness could ensue.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Consequentionalism

by Anonymous 11 years ago