"Rights"
Schedule Wayne Holstad for Your Group
Order by credit card ~ Order by check or money order
© Alethos Press LLC
PO Box 600160
St. Paul, MN 55106
Ironically, the vacuum
created by the denial of truth has resulted in the arrival of a multitude of
new “rights.” The new ideas and definitions of rights did not appear
spontaneously. New definitions of “rights” result from each new philosophy
that leases space in the “marketplace of ideas.” “Rights” was originally a
Christian concept. The modern conflict and confusion regarding the specific
“rights” that are entitled to legal protection result from the refusal to
define the origin and nature of “rights” in the same way that Jefferson
stated them in the Declaration of Independence.
When rights are adequately defined, an individual
whose rights have been infringed can protect them by appealing for justice
to the courts of law. When the courts of law misdefine rights or refuse to
enforce justice by not protecting individual rights, individuals will
inevitably seek redress and justice outside of the courts of law. It is a
historical fact that the major civil wars, in England in the 1600s and
America in the 1860s, followed erroneous court cases.
The American Revolution, in contrast with the
French Revolution, was not rebellion from legitimate authority, but
rebellion from illegitimate authority exercised by the King of England and
Parliament. The American revolutionaries did not spontaneously reject
English law; rather, they tried long and hard to win justice. “But when a
long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object
evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right,
it is their duty, to throw off such government,” they stated in the
Declaration. They declared, via a long list of refusals by the King and
Parliament to hear their petitions, that they had to resort to rebellion to
secure their natural rights as Englishmen. As a consequence, the colonists
sought protection of their natural individual rights from the Supreme Judge
of the Universe, rather than from King George III.
The various usages of the term “rights” is
analogous to the imprecision in the usages of the terms “liberty” and
“freedom.” All three terms relate to the same subject, and vary depending
upon philosophy and worldview. Essentially, modern conflicts over the
correct meaning of “rights” are traceable to three, separate and distinct
worldviews: (1) Christianity, (2) humanism, and (3) libertarianism. These
three distinctive worldviews have been in conflict in different forms for
2,000 years.
Christian orthodoxy has often been in conflict
with humanism and sometimes been corrupted by humanist philosophy.
Christianity and humanists both emphasize the need to have compassion for
and provide assistance to fellow humans. Christians do so because God has
commanded them to do so. Humanists do so because mutual assistance, absent
divine protection, is the only way to elevate mankind above tribalism and
the law of the jungle.