Can anyone explain what a right is? I suggest we disallow any further activism ensuring any other special interest groups achieve the “rights” they continue to demand, until someone properly defines the meaning of the word.
Why does the reader think that most will not bother to ask the question or to define the term? Please remember that groups such as militant homosexuals and abortion-crazy feminists have used the expression inaccurately in order to achieve special privileges and consideration, not true equality (which they already had, under the law, to begin with). The very reason these demagogues do not bother to explain the term is because the definition contradicts the ends they seek.
Noah Webster adequately explains what the word right means:
“In morals and religion, just; equitable; accordant to the standard of truth and justice or the will of God. That alone is right in the sight of God, which is consonant to his will or law; this being the only perfect standard of truth and justice. In social and political affairs, that is right which is consonant to the laws and customs of a country, provided these laws and customs are not repugnant to the laws of God. A man’s intentions may be right though his actions may be wrong in consequence of a defect in judgment.”
It becomes plainly evident that the word has been degraded due to its redefinition. Such a redefinition has occurred because charlatans have intentionally misapplied the term. Consider that, nowadays, a right is whatever I feel or my representative group feels is society’s obligation to concede me or us, irrespective of an objective, divine standard.
Yes, you read correctly. I meant to say God establishes the standard for rights and therefore morality, not man. This is proven by the fact that man is incapable of producing such a standard since he himself is created and, because of his corrupt nature, primarily self-interested. This being the case, mankind’s proclivities and capricious desires will be many and wildly divergent. Therefore, most will seek their own advantage and demand that their individual views and inclinations be “respected” and observed. Considering this, who is right? Who is wrong? In the end, it all leads to social bedlam. (It must also be noted that, typically, man’s dispositions will usually be destructive. For evidence seek out the effects of rampant deviant sexuality, narcotics consumption, crooked business dealings and the like.)
Here’s the main point: Many have been deceived into believing that the majority of the movements which purport to defend a certain group’s rights are reasonable, when, in fact, they are based on nothing more than trickery. I’ll prove my point using a bit of sarcasm in the form of fake advice.
If the reader desires to start a mass movement which will garner popular support, use the term “rights” as an adjective for maximum effect. Additionally, since most will not take the time to thoroughly research an issue in order to determine if their support is merited, using the expression will ensure that the dupable public’s emotions will be manipulated enough to gather their approval. All of this is also accomplished by omitting key facts that would otherwise demonstrate your movement to be based on a lie and therefore drain support.
In other words, be a demagogue, use the public’s ignorance in your favor, appeal to everyone’s baser instincts and watch the movement grow.
Actually, I forgot to mention another key ingredient to the formula: the necessity of an enemy to complete your sentimental narrative. Part of the campaign is to convince the public that you, as a person and part of a larger collective, are suffering irreparable tribulations and harm at the hands of certain oppressors. This vile group is the obstacle to your and your group’s ultimate happiness. Remember, the talking point is that all you hope for is to be able to do what others do but without the interference of the enemy.
Does any of this sound familiar to the reader? If you answered that the described tactics reflect the strategy of homosexual militants during the past 30 years, you should be content that you are part of the most bigoted, hateful people the world has ever known – Christians! That’s right, you are the oppressor homosexuals have complained about over the last three decades or so. You are the unimaginable evil entity which desired that reprobate sexuality continue to be considered reprobate by the public. You are the monster that impeded the recognition of the perversion of marriage called “gay marriage”. You have obstructed monogamous homosexual partnerships, even though it is common knowledge that homosexuals are anything but. You resisted their redefinition of an institution that wasn’t created by man or governments. You won’t even allow for minors to have a “coming of age” party with pedophiles.
Now, you, worthless, intolerant, pile of fertilizer, are attempting to continue your violent crusade against the inheritors of the aforementioned militant movement, transgenders (and soon enough, pedophiles).
Although the debate is “settled” over the changing of one’s biological sex, you, anti-science Luddite, continue to insist that transgenderism isn’t normal, isn’t scientifically plausible and that it leads to a 40% suicide rate. Forget the fact that you are well aware of the scheming that occurs in order to change public perception about an issue that is personally and culturally destructive. Are you happy now, you reactionary simpleton?!
I’ve written this piece to warn the reader that the same tactics Christians have had to face from the homosexual militants, feminists and the like is about to repeat itself. Also, the reason I’ve promulgated the accurate definition of the word “right”, is for your own benefit. “How so?”, you may ask.
Next time an ignoramus or impudent activist uses the, what I call, rights card in a debate, please proceed to explain to them what the actual definition of right is. Seeing as what they procure doesn’t accord with the meaning and scope of the word, you’ll loudly proclaim that you are not one to be misled or trifled with. Lastly, share this information with others so they too will be immune from mindlessly supporting the continuing immoral onslaught, disguised as a part of the “equality movements”.
Trust me, if Paul Revere would have been alive today he would have even warned the British that the trannies were approaching.