What’s Left of Rights
This is as good a time as any to remember what rights are. We again find ourselves reviewing the basics. Some nefarious political factions either won’t learn or strive to forget. They can decide which is cooler.
Those claiming rights aren’t absolute use free speech to do so, which should offer one practical lesson. Flaunting decency by using crises to inflict their glorious restrictions is how we’ll reach utopia. It’s tough to convince you unless you’re in pain, so be glad things suck enough to enable glory.
You already have rights. Well, that’s a relief. Their natural existence doesn’t offer much consolation to those who think they should be provided with items. But having to obtain something is the only way this works. Besides, you’re free to get your own stuff.
Writing them down doesn’t make them so. The Constitution merely confirms what humans innately get. Rightfully citing the Bill of Rights comes with the subtext of knowing just why they’re listed in the first place.
Do as you wish. That means not expecting others to do it for you. Rights can’t be provided, which is a frustrating reality for those who feel they’re entitled to stuff. The best way to increase a commodity’s availability is precisely to not promise it. But pretending any goods are free is more fun for a moment.
Restrictions are supposed to involve stopping harming someone else. Um, that’s what crime is. Excessive activists are not into speech or self-defense but think abortion is guaranteed. I can’t seem to find it listed, although a sonogram shows the victim.
A bad law is just the start. Liberals might be surprised to learn shoplifting and mugging aren’t federal offenses. That could be why they’re not keen on arresting, much less prosecuting. Proclaiming you can do what you wish to an unborn baby is at worst not a right spelled out in the Constitution. We could at least let states decide who gets to be born.
People with honest intentions sift through manifestos of murderers while baffled. There’s natural confusion from those who are both decent and logical. It’s important to not bother to expect consistency from someone aberrant enough to think a massacre makes sense.
The more calculating try to find evidence fiends are aligned with their political foes. The inevitable update involving how much their own views overlap is a fitting result.
Those seeking to exploit murders to confiscate rights blame actions on read words. Criminals end up getting to decide what gets censored. On top of the lust for limiting ideas, good luck with the presumption they’ll always be in power to decide what qualifies.
It’s uncanny how many people can encounter hateful notions and not be inspired to commit mass murder. You may even start to believe it’s the fiend’s fault and not the racist idiotic loser on a message board. That line of thinking will be demonized next.
We should want those with bigoted notions to keep talking. Racists are too dumb to realize they’re identifying themselves to decent people. Free speech is self-regulating like every other market. Try banning ideas and speakers will go private if you want it harder to spot them.
Aspiring autocrats who think government should and can control everything naturally apply that notion to words. Uncannily, it’s those they disagree with who they always identify as committing hate speech. I’m sure they’ll always be in power and never rue an ironic lesson from turned tables.
You thought you’d get your rights back. It’s adorable. The era of confiscating your basic liberties for your own alleged good isn’t about to end. Getting away with it means more of it. Those who take what’s yours under quasi-legal pretenses demand you don’t obey their precedent. Don’t sneeze too loudly.
Liberals’ first reflex during any horrific moment is deciding how they can use agony to pimp their agenda only because they care. The sickest natural result of presuming everything should be political leads to naturally calling to restrict freedoms no matter the offense. Complaining about countless other violations of liberty will be defined as hate speech once they figure out how to word executive orders.
The only way to make it worse is how much their beliefs suck. They hurt in practice, not just theory. Demanding gun control while corpses are still warm is one way of radiating righteousness. Sanctimony is only made worse when applied to areas where they have every restriction they’ve ever demanded. You’d think they might find happiness in policy success. But inevitable failure means they must pretend the solution to screwing up our lives involves even more infiltration. The twisted results show how concepts can have an effect if implemented. There will be no cheering.
Enemies of basic rights are against checks and balances in every sense. The only thing that should be unlimited is their power. Trust them, as their schemes can’t come into force if you doubt those elected are blessed with the authority to makes your decisions. Take your scrutiny to some hateful nation with autonomy.
Imaginary rights are a real problem. We’re almost impressed they found one way to make it worse. Declaring that speech has constraints but health care provided by others does not is protected by the First Amendment. Daftness is allowed, which you’d think those who indulge might appreciate. You get housing as a result of existing but can’t defend it with a gun. They proclaim the right to take yours.