If you Google the words “rights”, the first entry will be to a wikipedia article. That site is a tremendous resource, but it is a mixed blessing; that is to say it is a menace and a curse to those who do not understand it.
The Wikipedia entry on rights contains the following sections:
Contents
- Etymology
- A wide variety of meanings
- Natural rights versus legal rights
- Claim rights versus liberty rights
- Positive rights versus negative rights
- Individual rights versus group rights
- Other senses
- Rights and politics
- History of rights
- See also
- References
- External links
The section which got me off my duff this morning is the following,m which I reproduce in full:
A Claim Right Claim rights pertain most of the time to human rights and may include in them liberty rights. The reciprocal however does not hold true. This is to say that in a claim right there lies the notion of enforceability that is also included in a liberty right. However only so far as this enforcement includes acts of self defense and disciplinary action, in cases where such a claim or liberty right may have been violated does the notion of enforceability exist. A claim right is distinct from a liberty right in that along with a claim right naturally comes the notion of responsibilities or duties existing in other parties. As well as it may hold that another party has some duty to do something, this notion of duty may also be of another party to not commit some act. For instance if someone has the claim right that others may not take away his own property, inherently there follows the duty of other parties not to take away his property.
via Claim rights and liberty rights – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
At first blush, the distinction between liberty rights and claim rights seemed legitimate. I had never heard of it as such, and decided to educate myself. The problem is that right away, I could tell that something was cross-wired.
