John S
In all honesty, Ignorance is no excuse. Just because you were Ignorant of my existence before we met here doesn't mean I didn't exist. And, just because you appear to be Ignorant of our Inherent Rights doesn't mean they don't exist.
Frankly, I was hoping for debate concerning our Right of Locomotion instead of a debate concerning the very existence of Inherent Rights. But, that's okay. The recognition of Inherent Rights pre-date even our own government's recognition of them (I am buttuming you are from the US). It's not like I'm proposing something here that wasn't proposed more than 700 years ago. Our own Consbreastution recognized them over 200 years ago. The Magna Carta recognized them as early as 1297.
Although, I will admit that virtually all these writings on our Inherent Rights are somewhat muddled by their employment of a "God". The problem here being that the existence of a "God" can be neither proved nor disproved. These Inherent Rights do indeed exist, but their method of proof was faulty. It's as if an Innocent man were to pose no further proof of their Innocence, even though it exists, than to say: "God Knows I'm Innocent." They attempted to prove the provable using un-provable evidence
Yes, I say these Inherent Rights ARE provable. Instead of using un-provable evidence, such as a "God" which Creates, I exchange that with "Creation" (NOT "Creator", which is just another "God"), allowing the reader to envision any or no Creator at all of their own choosing. Our Individual Existence is proof positive of our Individual Creation. While a Creator might be reasonably denied, Creation itself can not be reasonably denied. Our Creation is the basis upon which my Primary Evidence is built.
What would you consider the primary aspect endowed by their Creation upon Sentient, or Self Aware beings? What is a word derived from "Sentient"? That word is: "Consent", which means something like: "Of Sentient origin". And, that primary aspect endowed upon Sentient Beings by their Creation is their Power of Consent.
Consent is the Inherent power of a Sentient being to voluntarily give buttent or approval to something done or proposed, and is from which all sentient behavior originates. The giving of Consent to something is to claim that with such Consent, that thing is Rightful, and that without such Consent, that thing is wrong. By recognizing and exercising our Power of Consent, we recognize and witness to the very existence of Right and wrong.
Creation endows Sentient Beings with the Power of Consent, which endows us with the existence of Right and wrong. Combine these together, and you get Rightful Consent and Wrongful Consent. If I give my friend Consent to enter My House, that would be Rightful Consent. If I give my friend Consent to enter Your House, that would, of course, be Wrongful Consent.
So now, we know that both Rightful and Wrongful Consent exist, endowed upon us by our Creation as Sentient Beings, and now it is upon us, as Sentient Beings, to recognize between Rightful Consent and Wrongful Consent. Rightful Consent is a Right among our Rights. So in our attempts to correctly recognize our Inherent Rights, we produce our Enumerated Rights.
Keep in mind there is a difference between our Inherent Rights and our Enumerated Rights. As I said above, we attempt to correctly recognize our Inherent Rights, but it is entirely possible that we incorrectly recognize a Right. After all, we're not perfect. But, nice thing about being imperfect is that there is always room for improvement. So, while Inherent Rights are unchanging and Inalienable, Enumerated Rights do come, go and change as we attempt to improve our recognition of our Inherent Rights.
So, while I will admit that our Enumerated Rights are indeed a Social construct, which can be added to, changed, and subtracted from, I still maintain my recognition of our Inherent Rights, which are indeed Inalienable, and which our Enumerated Rights attempt to Mirror.
