One thought on “Canada’s Human Rights Mausoleum: a urinating match of competing victimhoods”

  1. This is just sick.

    When groups have rights, individuals don’t – simply because such a stance creates an injustice system, where some people (these days, in the West, who are part of some subjectively determined “identifiable protected minority groups,” including “women’s rights”) have more rights than others, which means those others have LESS rights than the protected group, and so are to be officially pre-judged as guilty until never proven innocent in comparison.

    We must stop people from pretending there are group rights at all.

    When groups have rights, those not in those groups have LESS rights, and so all such laws discriminate against real individual human citizens; they are illegal “laws.” Government is us – it’s our largest, bulk-buying best priced collectively-owned insurance company; those we hire (‘elect’) to run it, are supposed only to maintain it and defend our collective needs, never cater to private wants.

    Fred Bastiat noted something like “We all have the natural right to self-defense; bad laws are those which try to deprive us of that right.”

    Liberals always insist only groups have rights, and so the only defense we need is the government; ergo, we must, in stead, all strive to learn to become better victims. It’s our civic duty! Whee!

    The only real ‘rule’ of morality and civilization is the Golden Rule of Law, which is simply: “Do Not Attack First.” All sub-sequent laws should be based on this. That way, the only real right anyone has, is to not be attacked first, and our only real responsibility is to not attack innocent others first.

    By agreeing to this one simple rule, we achieve trust, progress, and civilization.

    Thus we as real human individuals have a natural right to self-defense. Especially from gangs proclaiming they’re entitled to “group rights.”

Comments are closed.