Nope. It was ostensibly a picture of an "attractive woman" in a one piece swimsuit, but to me (and Plaguefear as well), "her" face was awfully mannish and certainly caked in makeup.

We've always been talking about society. People keep intentionally (or not) conflating "natural rights" to mean "state of nature amongst animals." Natural rights are derived from reason.

Natural rights can be revoked, so why give them a special name?

All kinds of rights can be violated. Legal rights can be revoked. Natural rights cannot.

I remember seeing the picture. The only thing I would consider "inappropriate" about it was the sub it was posted in. Other than that, there was nothing wrong with it.

Nothing in the Bill of Rights is covered by this...these are legal rights. Property is a legal right.

I feel like self defense is the only natural right. But even that is revoked in the ways we execute and imprison people, globally and historially speaking....it is contingent on power.

The Greeks were right about rights being a matter to be discussed among equals. Melian Dialogue. "The strong have the power to do what they're going to do and the weak must accept."

I feel like this holds true.

I also don't necessarily believe in Rousseau's noble savage and think Hobbes was more accurate about a state of nature.

This post was edited by Skinned on Apr 24 2020 08:31am

...

Nipped in the bud, before I finished typing it.

This post was edited by Ghot on Apr 24 2020 08:43am

If right is not an expectation to be treated a certain way as agreed upon by peers than what exactly is a right by definition.

I have given a clear definition of a right what is your clear definition of a right?

At no point have I stated anything to give you the impression I feel any differently with this assessment.