Try "unalienable Rights" As in "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."Zack Morris wrote:Natural Law is an abstract guiding principle that is subject to a huge amount of interpretation. It is not universal and it cannot be codified. This is a serious problem for Constitutional literalists. Theories of Natural Law vary considerably and are dependent on subjective beliefs about human nature and morality. No one can devise any "test" to determine whether or not a right is protected by Natural Law, so therefore it's all bullshit.Mr. Perfect wrote:You have no idea what you ware talking about. You just discovered Natural Law a few months ago.Zack Morris wrote: "Natural law" has always been a vague and ill-defined concept. There is no firmly agreed upon basis of what natural rights humans have. There is no consistent way to derive natural laws or to test for conformance. Property is a particularly problematic point for natural law because property rights are generally derived from one's ability to employ force to occupy territory and dispossess others, against their will. Property rights require agreement and cooperation or they are meaningless.
The United States was founded on Natural Law. The Founders couldn't stop talking about it.
Natural rights are Survival of the fittest. Not bullshit, but the way things are without civil society. Though the definition of "fittest" can be pretty fuzzy in general. But it is a moment to moment kind of thing.