It boils down to how you define a "right".
My view is that a right can exist even if it is only an artificial construct, and even if it can, in fact, be denied someone.
The "fundamental right" to life is part of what makes us human. It is the basic groundrock of society. It's what stops us hitting each other over the head with rocks.
As soon as you say "he has no right to life" you are denying him his humanity; his very existence - and you are also making yourself something less than human by not recognising this right in another.
Despite all the things we call "worse than death", we know that death is, ultimately, the end. There is no return path.
Now, I'm sure you will all find plenty to disagree with here, but I really don't want to get bogged down in another argument over the precise meaning of "right" and "privilege". |
