Human rights is just idealism mixed with politics under the name

>>1461850
Ok, but what difference does it make? does it make any sense in our current circumstances to abolish these rights? Does it make constitutional principles any more flexible knowing they are the laws of men and not God?

>>1461850
First, no. That argument is shit, being that there are female dominant species all over the damn place.

Second, "natural order" arguments are moot when concerning a civilized society. This is not Lord of the Flies, there are rules that need to be decided based on the situation at hand.

>>1461894
This man gets it.

>>1461894
>Second, "natural order" arguments are moot when concerning a civilized society. This is not Lord of the Flies, there are rules that need to be decided based on the situation at hand.
That's the joke.

In most species, that is, the nature of most of the animals on the Earth, the female is usually dominant.


Human rights are what you fight the establishment to get from them. They don't exist intrinsically, it's just what the have-nots can demand from the haves.