ETHICS AND MORALITY. RIGHTS- WHAT THEY ARE, AND WHAT THEY ARE NOT. PT 3.

Can we break down the Hierarchy of which Category of Rights is the most important, and can supersede the others?  Yes, it is possible to do this, and the following is the result of such an analysis.

HUMAN RIGHTS-  Must, by their very nature, rank as #1.  They are the only Category of Rights that is binding on all Countries, States and Governments.  This is the goal of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, to create and enforce Laws that bind the people of all nations to a Universal set of Moral Standards in the proper treatment of every member of the Human race.

Further, that these are Rights that cannot be relinquished, even on a voluntary basis. THE BOTTOM LINE-  HUMAN RIGHTS CANNOT BE DENIED, LOST OR GIVEN UP, REGARDLESS OF CIRCUMSTANCES.

CIVIL RIGHTS-  Are a sub-category of CITIZENS RIGHTS, but are placed on a level higher in importance. Citizens Rights may include such things as Freedom of Speech, Religion, Assembly etc., but may not be legally applied in every situation. This is where the Category of Civil Rights can be found.
Consider the following : 

        Example #1-  Freedom of Religion allows you to believe and promote a certain set of Moral Values.  However, the application of such values in the Public Sector may not be considered Legal.

         Example #2-  Freedom of Speech permits you to advocate and relay information to other people.  However, the Legal System may create limits on the How, When and Where such information is disseminated.

         Example #3-  Freedom of Assembly-  Allows you to Come Together and/or Associate with other like minded individuals.  A Legal problem may arise if these meetings are used for planning Criminal Activities, or for the purpose of creating situations that have a detrimental affect on other persons and groups.

These examples have one main goal:  That Government has a Moral duty to its citizens and society at large, to create restrictions on Individual Rights, for the benefit of all.

End of PT 3.

ETHICS AND MORALITY. RIGHTS- WHAT THEY ARE, AND WHAT THEY ARE NOT. PT 2.

\Rights, when we are discussing the Public Sector, generally fall into two categories;

1)  HUMAN RIGHTS-  These are Protections, Freedoms and Guarantees that are bestowed upon individuals by virtue of their being part of the Human Race.  To a certain degree some of these may be applied to all living things, but only to a certain extent and varies depending on specific situations.

2) CITIZENS RIGHTS-  Are granted by a governing body with the legal authority over a specified jurisdiction, to individuals identified as part of the recognized civil population.  These Rights can vary greatly, depending on the source of Authority.  i.e (Constitutional Republic, Monarchy

Oligarchy, Dictatorial etc.)

This brings us to the concept of CIVIL RIGHTS, which is basically a sub-category

of CITIZENS RIGHTS. The main difference is;

 -  Rights given to all Citizens may include the ability to chose a System of Morality and/or Faith that is constructed by the individual, and is not interfered with by the State.  Further, that one cannot be held either Criminally or Civilly for Behavior or Speech that others consider offensive.

 -  Civil Rights are guarantees set up by the State/Government, that protect individuals from Malicious, Discriminatory, Arbitrary and Hateful acts that target them specifically as a single person or as part of a group.

These Rights apply to both the Public and Private sectors. Civil Rights are basically set up to"Level the Playing Field", in which no single person or group has an unfair advantage over other parts of society.

However they are applied, not all Rights are created equal.  Some can never be taken away, Some are Valid only in certain cases, and others may be given up voluntarily.

There is one main rule that applies to all Rights:  NO ONE CAN EXERCISE A RIGHT, WHICH AT THE SAME TIME VIOLATES THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS.

End of PT 2.

ETHICS AND MORALITY. RIGHTS- WHAT THEY ARE, AND WHAT THEY ARE NOT. PT 1.

 

There is perhaps no more important word, when we discuss such issues as Freedom of Choice,

Protection from Governmental Interference into our lives, and yes, "Life, Liberty and the pursuit
of Happiness." Yet, the definition of RIGHTS seems to be something many don't understand. 

Even more alarmingly, there are those who define the term in different ways at different times, depending on the agenda they are supporting in the latest election cycle.

The goal of this article is to define what is meant when the word RIGHTS is used properly, and to shed light on the improper usage of the term.

In general terms, a RIGHT can be referenced and defined in several ways:

-  A Protection against Persecution for certain behaviors, that an individual or group may engage in.

-  The ability to make decisions about ones' own life, free of improper

influence or malicious retribution.

-  Protecting groups that are recognized legally, from hostile actions by those

who desire to inflict harm upon the members, without just cause.

-  Punishment administered to any individual, Either by Government, Social Organization, or Employer must be justified through defined procedures that allow the individual an opportunity to provide a proper defense to any and all charges. Further, that judgment will be based on facts and evidence that were gathered in a prescribed manner.  Of course, the degree to which these are implemented differs from the Public to the Private sector.

When speaking of Rights that are found in the Private Sector, we usually find them to be creations of contractual agreements between Employer and Employee, or in By-Laws that are part of a fraternal organizations code of conduct for members. By their very nature, these Rights affect a very select group.

This is not true in the Public Sector.

End of PT 1.  

Long email about gerrymandering. please read – it’s important. DGA.

DAVID — when the Supreme Court upheld partisan gerrymandering, we knew it wouldn’t take long for the GOP to seize the moment and further manipulate maps, undermine the will of voters, and block fair districts. Now self-serving Republicans are moving to manipulate the system in states across the country. The GOP’s partisan gerrymandering isn’t simply unfair, it’s a tactic used to systematically silence millions of voters and lock Democrats out of office nationwide. We cannot let them succeed. That’s why our Unrig the Map program is leading the charge to fight back. But we urgently need your help to get to 15,000 more signatures nationwide. Will you join me and add your name to end partisan gerrymandering? The Washington Post reports that the court’s 5-to-4 decision “brings new urgency to [the] Democratic fight to win state seats.” That’s absolutely right. With the 2020 census right around the corner, Democratic governors are now the strongest line of defense against Republican gerrymandering. SIGN ON: We need 156 signatures from 02771 to end partisan gerrymandering! As the Political Director at the DGA, I work day in and day out to make sure our campaigns are prepared to take on their Republican opponents and have the resources they need to win. Last cycle, we won SEVEN redistricting targets with our Unrig the Map program! Now we’re launching an all-out offensive to put Democratic governors in charge in five key states ahead of the 2020 census and redistricting. If we can win these races and secure fair maps, Democrats can deal a crushing blow to Trump’s agenda. But everything depends on what we do right now. Please, speak out before it’s too late: Add your name to put a stop to partisan gerrymandering! Thank you for taking action on this critical issue. Marshall Cohen Political Director Democratic Governors Association