When "Rights" are Wrong
I'm not talking about "universal rights", because these cosmic entities are beyond the scope of this brief blog entry, nevermind that this entire concept is beyond the comprehension of this simple blogger. I am not even talking about "human rights", which are international in nature, and thus not apropos to this communique. Rather, I'm talking about "citizen rights".
These "citizen rights" should apply to all citizens of the United States of America. They are not meant to apply to illegal aliens, tourists, visiting students, or any other group of non-citizens. If such were the case, there would be no need to identify "Women's Rights", "Black Rights", "Latino Rights", "Gay Rights", etc., ad nauseum. I am already in trouble. Maybe we should be talking about "African-American Rights", "Chicano Rights", "Gay & Lesbian Rights", etc. See What I mean? The entire scope of the list is inconceivable. Everyone is a minority in one sense or another. We could completely Balkanize the country if we follow this way of thinking.
If we truly recognized the concept of "citizen rights" in all aspects of our society there would be no need for the Equal Rights Amendment, The Voter's Rights Act, or the Civil Rights Acts, Gay Marriage Laws, or other similar such legislation.
A simple example follows:
If married couples qualify for advantageous treatment by the IRS, Health Insurance Companies, lending institutions, and the estate laws, to name but a few entities, should not such benefits be available to other established households. Examples of such households are easy to enumerate: (1) Adult siblings living together; (2) adult children living with a parent or parents (not just minor children or children still classified as students); (3) heterosexual couples who live together but not really "common law" marriages, whatever that entails (I'm not clear about the rights of such relationships-How long does a couple have to shack up before the relationship is deemed a common law marriage? If citizen rights apply, the duration of the relationship is immaterial) ; and, of course, (4) gay couples (again the length of the relationship is immaterial, if the relationship exist at the time of the benefit, it should be extended).
There are other examples available. Maybe readers will offer others. Just go back to the Constitution. Extend equal rights to all citizens. Eliminate the need for self-serving special interest groups. Avoid the devisive influence of such groups. Work for the good of all citizens.
These "citizen rights" should apply to all citizens of the United States of America. They are not meant to apply to illegal aliens, tourists, visiting students, or any other group of non-citizens. If such were the case, there would be no need to identify "Women's Rights", "Black Rights", "Latino Rights", "Gay Rights", etc., ad nauseum. I am already in trouble. Maybe we should be talking about "African-American Rights", "Chicano Rights", "Gay & Lesbian Rights", etc. See What I mean? The entire scope of the list is inconceivable. Everyone is a minority in one sense or another. We could completely Balkanize the country if we follow this way of thinking.
If we truly recognized the concept of "citizen rights" in all aspects of our society there would be no need for the Equal Rights Amendment, The Voter's Rights Act, or the Civil Rights Acts, Gay Marriage Laws, or other similar such legislation.
A simple example follows:
If married couples qualify for advantageous treatment by the IRS, Health Insurance Companies, lending institutions, and the estate laws, to name but a few entities, should not such benefits be available to other established households. Examples of such households are easy to enumerate: (1) Adult siblings living together; (2) adult children living with a parent or parents (not just minor children or children still classified as students); (3) heterosexual couples who live together but not really "common law" marriages, whatever that entails (I'm not clear about the rights of such relationships-How long does a couple have to shack up before the relationship is deemed a common law marriage? If citizen rights apply, the duration of the relationship is immaterial) ; and, of course, (4) gay couples (again the length of the relationship is immaterial, if the relationship exist at the time of the benefit, it should be extended).
There are other examples available. Maybe readers will offer others. Just go back to the Constitution. Extend equal rights to all citizens. Eliminate the need for self-serving special interest groups. Avoid the devisive influence of such groups. Work for the good of all citizens.
posted by the doc at 10:52 PM
3 Comments:
great, now convince the major health corporations, drug companies and government and I'm right there with you!
Doc for Congress in 2010!
I couldn't have said it better mysel Doc. If you'll run for office, I'll run your campaign!
Post a Comment
<< Home