h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I thoroughly enjoyed this article. It clarifies a lot of things about rights and put things in perspective. Far too often (IMHO) we hear people clamouring that a certain proposed course of action is 'a denial of rights', or 'an infringement of liberties'. The people that say these things don't seem to consider the 'rights' of others (i.e., the people the action is meant to protect), only their own rights. As the author states, these people don't seem to care about their own duties.

I suspect that this article is going to end up on the 'most neglected' list, which will be a great shame.

I agree. The topics this entry SHOULD bring up are numerous. But I feel particularly ill-equipped to start any, my interests lying elsewhere. And of course this makes me part of the problem.

But it does bring to mind works by people who do pay attention, like the late Christopher Lasch and his best known work, "The Culture of Narcissicism". Several decades old, but still ominously relevant.

Could we have a bit of cross-linkage with, for example, the entries on the declarations of human rights?

It's an interesting entry - thought-provoking, certainly - especially given recent h2g2 discussions on rights...

Thanks, all, for your observations. I'm sorry my reply is so very late - I didn't realise anyone had commented!

I don't think this entry can be changed or updated now that it's been 'edited'. Is this right? If not, then:

Steve K:

Interesting: what do you think these topics might be (a brief list of titles would be quite sufficient if you don't have time for more. )

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

... uhhh, well (scratching head) ... maybe the right to freedom of speech. To some, it seems to trump the separation of church and state. An excerpt freom the NY Times, Sept. 2000, regarding two small towns in the Houston, Texas area:

"The game tonight -- between the Santa Fe Indians and the Hitchcock Bulldogs, which Santa Fe won 21-14 -- was the first in town after the Supreme Court ruling that prohibited the pregame prayers led by students in a ritual that amounted to an official ceremony.

"The 6-to-3 majority opinion by Justice John Paul Stevens said that even when attendance at a game was voluntary and even when the decision to pray was made by students instead of school-district officials, ''the delivery of a pregame prayer has the improper effect of coercing those present to participate in an act of religious worship'' and violated the Constitution's ban on state promotion of religion."

Of course, many people do not agree with the Supreme Court.

And to others, freedom of speech allows massive donations to political candidates, one of whom stated that the donations do not buy any special consideration, just "good government". A more honest response was probably given by banker Charles Keating, who I recall went to jail during the Savings and Loan scandal years ago. When asked if he thought his political donations bought any special consideration, he said, "I certainly hope so!" In a recent memoir, Senator John McCain says "The worst mistake of his life ... was trying to help his friend Charles Keating when Lincoln Savings and Loan got into trouble in the 1980's ..."

Hi Steve! Thanks for the reply! I regret I'm going to disagre with you. Regret because I can see you're being helpful and constrcutive. Nevertheless, I refer you to the second point in the 'disclaimer' section:

"[this entry is not] about particular rights. These are outside the scope of this entry. Whether or not they are rights is a matter of opinion that depends on cultures, religions and individuals; no general conclusions can be usefully drawn."

I still stick to that. There are so many 'inalienable' rights, such as freedom of speech, education, health care, not to mention the right not to be muged, raped or murdered! Each of these could justify one or more guide entries of its own.

If I tried to include them, the current point of the entry would disappear under the weight of other words, and I might be held to account for those 'rights' I neglected by omission!

I'm the first to admit that this entry isn't perfect, but I don't think that adding *any* particular 'rights' would improve it at all. Sorry!

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

No problem, after re-re-reading the entry (not a stutter), I (sort of) see what you're getting at. It's probably my engineering background that makes me want practical examples or case studies, rather than abstract concepts (like my wife the math major - her textbooks look like Greek to me. In fact they ARE substantially in Greek )

Yes, I'm an engineer too, by training. [I design software for a living.] Examples are invaluable in explaining things, generally. However, in this case, it is my aim to discuss the much-neglected duties that (IMO) are an indivisible part of rights. Any additional material and this - the point of the entry - would be obscured.

Thanks again for taking the trouble to comment.

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"