I Have the Right - Dammit!

Demolocke’s Agenda Article/Post Caveat (Read First Please: Click the Link)

How many times have we heard this meme, “I have the right …,” and fill in the ellipse with what ever statement you wish to make? I understand because at one point not all that long ago I would tell myself those same words until someone spread out the truth in front of me then hit me with a huge oak 2x4 so that I would actually see and believe. 

We, in this wonderful country of ours, have a lot of rights, rights that many in other countries would die for if they could get them for themselves. But, what are our rights in this country truly, factually and accurately? Not an easy question to answer and in truth there may be only a few who truly understand where our rights begin and where they end. I am not one of those few but I am trying to picture that truth in my head so explains all this typing. 

We all, the human species, tend to assume that we have certain rights and we assume that those rights are supported by the … wait for it, “The Bill of Rights,” but just how granular is that document and its meanings because there are those in academia and the legal professions who are still trying after years of studies and such to determine the true rights of our people.

Where I see a dangerous curves in this path is the written rule of law about citizen rights is they are so vague and open ended that each human being can come up with plausible explanations why something they want or need can be a unalienable right of theirs and I have wondered, is this true?

I am not a legal professional and I have read the Bill of Rights several times and all I can say is that I am not sure, not positive nor even confident that I can explain or decide what my rights are vs. what rights I should not assume are mine without question but I have some ideas on it, yep, you knew that this opinionated author would say that, right? 

I do have certain rights but they are not unlimited and they do dissipate and disappear according to certain criteria. First, there is the law, the laws that state that you can or cannot do certain things. Those laws take precedence in any and all rights you may or may not think or feel you have because once you open your front door, take a walk to the front gate of your yard and step out onto the Public Domain all that changes. Yes, if you wish to break the law in your own home by all means but beware that if it gets out into the public domain you are legally liable and all is right in the world. 

That nasty public domain is a real bitch, it is that common area of life that says regardless of your personal rights once you encounter others you have to make allowances so that both can life, breath and experience a certain level and type of freedom that does not infringe on one anothers … wait for it … rights. Isn’t this getting a bit confusing don’t you think and I am not even a professional academic on the subject or a legal professional - whoppeee!

Even in the public domain there are rules and laws, both written and not as well as those legal aspects meant to control and govern those who come together in the public domain with distinct, separate and important cultural beliefs and differences all within that social construct and membership collectives, i.e., various families of different race, creed, religious beliefs and socially created cultural systems, etc. Our countries bill of rights actually supports that various family like differences but not as if each were inviolate. 

Side Note: In human species we all need to collect together into tribe like groups for survival and in that instinctual driven DNA encoded way we need to collect together in such groups or tribes where we can hold on to those very cultural sudo-religious belief systems and hierarchies so that we can control, govern and survive better - it is nature’s way even in modern times. So, we tend to see even in major metropolises we see sections of that city divided as if by borders various cultures that came together for the comfort, safety and security of those we know and understand and believe in and with for - survival of all levels. It is when those borders get close and people travel across and through other neighborhoods be they actual in a city or perceived in various states or countries in and out of this one great country of ours. 

So, when our tribes need to connect and deal with other tribes we have to come to an understanding so that we don’t violate our inalienable rights, the ones that are not personal or of an emotional or of a religious nature, etc., so that we can communicate and exchange various needs and such in what we today call the Consumer Markets. 

Now, we have two public domains: First is the one we enter when we leave our homes and encounter others in our tribe. This requires rules, regulations and sometimes legal laws to govern and control. We may not like some but as a species we instinctually understand that if we don’t then there is chaos and we die. Second, is the one we enter as a tribe when one or more of us has to leave our “neighborhood, if you will” and enter into and encounter others of other tribes or neighborhoods. 

If we assume that our rights and beliefs are sacrosanct and the only “ONE TRUE BELIEF and RIGHT” we run into trouble because to exist and coexist we need to rein in ours enough to allow others the chance and opportunity to exist for a mutual benefit and that is a good thing. We then remember that once our encounter is successfully concluded we all return to our neighborhoods and homes to our cultural beliefs and lives knowing we all can exist as a species with regard to our individual tribal/neighbor respect, etc.

This is why I feel the Bill of Rights and our Rights are more fluid so that we can changes and adjust to “get along” for the common good of survival. So, when I think of “My Right to do this or that” I also have to consider how that right will effect those others that will be effected directly or indirectly when out of my home and neighborhood/tribe. 

For instance, the notice I received from my place of employment provided, I read the following, i.e., “On <a certain day of the week>, <on a date not specified for this article in 2016 at approximately 3:17 AM POLICE received a report of a sexual assault which had occurred at approximately 1:30 AM in an <location around here>.  The victim, a male person, met the suspect on the internet.  The victim and suspect met in the victim’s room of the <location> where the sexual assault occurred.”

First thing, yes both parties were exercising their rights as they understood them but some glaring things told me that if they had truly understood and took actions to avoid this event would possibly never happened. Yes, the person attacked has the right to meet with people regardless and yes, the person attached has the right to NOT be assaulted and Yes, the person attacked has the right to not be lied to or victimize or any other factor this involves both apparent and not. But, is that actually his or her right? I think so but then I tend to put in some common sense that in our world we are constantly exposed to danger and dangerous situations and we shall take it upon ourselves to gain the knowledge, come to understand that knowledge and then learn by experience how to use that knowledge toward - wait for it - SURVIVAL.

I would first make sure I understood the dangers and pitfalls of the Internet. It is apparent that the Internet is the Wild Wild World (West if you will) and that any protections out there are reactive, not proactive, and come after an incident so it makes it imperative that we, the individual, lean about that and take precautions to avoid being preyed upon. 

Never, ever, agree to meet anyone strange to you in such a secluded area because the worst and most grievously dangerous predators will work hard to get you to a secondary location, i.e., a secluded and private space where help is impossible and that means your home when alone as well. Secondary locations are those where the worst can happen such as torture with imminent death to follow with rare cases where the gravest of bodily harm are done.

If you meet someone on-line agree to meet in a very public place and make sure you bring a few friends along. Let the new person know that those two conditions are required and not open for debate for it is your health, well-being and life as stake regardless of what you THINK your rights are. 

So, “I have the right …” is great for discussions and conversations as well as presentations. But, those rights are not inviolate in that in regard to your right to your safety, security and health, which are inviolate, with conditions and considerations on how you exercise those rights, and this is where you have to tell yourself something. “Hey, I want to meet someone new. I found a possible connection at my favorite dating site on line. Hmmm, I have a group gathering at the local coffee shop around noonish next Wednesday so I will invite my new found possible friend to join us to get acquainted and see what happens.” 

That is being smart and you are not giving up what you perceive as your rights but simply adjusting the outcome of staying true to your rights so you can exercise them safely, securely and to your survival. 

I now have a suggestion that will help you verity and validate your rights. Get a book of the Bill of Rights, a copy for the country as well as any rights document that the State, City and County in which you live may or may not have. Get on line and find a site of laws, etc., for the country and your local area that you can search easily. Now, read the rights at least three times; first, a run through then; second, with a highlighter; and third, by writing by hand those highlights on to paper in long hand. Now, do a search to see what you feel are your rights to see if it triggers a feedback from the various sites mentioned. After a while you are going to find out that many of the things you THOUGHT were your rights were not but rather your wishes for the Utopia you wish our world existed in but doesn’t. 

There is NO PERFECT world. We can and have come close at times throughout human history but because we are human will never achieve totally and completely. It is the human nature and condition that makes us unable to achieve what we each perceive as a Utopia, a perfect world. They make great Sci-Fi movies and dramas and mysteries out of such things but truth be told, it ain’t possible. 

If we just come to realize that the world is still a very dangerous place with predators and sheep and then take the appropriate steps to learn, understand and live with those rules and requirements to avoid, deescalate and self-fense we can come very, very close to our Utopia. 

Note: There is a marked difference in our rights vs. our responsibilities as citizens of this great nation. 

NoteII: According to a source, the INS site, we as citizens have both rights and responsibilities and they say our citizenship is about shared values of freedom, liberty, and equality. As citizens we hold and expect that we have many benefits and equally important responsibilities where our core value is to hold and apply our individual commitment to our country and our form of government. The following are several rights and responsibilities LEGALLY required of every citizen:

RIGHTS:

• Freedom to express yourself.
• Freedom to worship as you wish.
• Right to a prompt, fair trial by jury.
• Right to vote in elections for public officials.
• Right to apply for federal employment requiring U.S. citizenship.
• Right to run for elected office.
• Freedom to pursue “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

RESPONSIBILITIES:

• Support and defend the Constitution.
• Stay informed of the issues affecting your community.
• Participate in the democratic process.
• Respect and obey federal, state, and local laws.
• Respect the rights, beliefs, and opinions of others.
• Participate in your local community.
• Pay income and other taxes honestly, and on time, to federal, state, and local authorities.
• Serve on a jury when called upon.
• Defend the country if the need should arise.

Don’t assume because making assumptions on such important rights and responsibilities leads to chaos where you can get hurt or die. Take a moment to read through them a few times then you begin to connect those rights/responsibilities to some of what I profess in the pervious paragraphs. One I hit on with my analogy of the house, yard, gate and public domain is, “Respect the rights, beliefs, and opinions of others.” 

As to the rights provided in such a terse way the full understanding can only come if you read the associated documents such as the Federal Papers as they relate to the constitution document where your right to “Express Yourself” is not inviolate but riddled with recommendations, conditions, social requirements and conditions not to forget the laws, etc. 

I could express my inner desire to do harm to a person but do I have the right to make that expression directly to that person? I use my own inner voice to ask myself, “Is it true the statement I make; is it necessary to make that statement; and is it kind to make the statement to this person?” Now, a caveat, it is not about how I feel and answer the questions but how I have the ability to empathize how the other person will feel about answering those questions. 

Ask also, do I have an inviolate right to pursue life, liberty and (this one is critical in this story) THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS? I perceive that many conflicts and resulting levels of violence come from one’s belief of when, where and how they pursue happiness but remember that it also involves a respect for the rights, beliefs and opinions of others. 

This is so complex and important and critical to how we live our lives it often leads to things like conflict, violence and socially driven war among ourselves as well as with others not of our clan, so to speak. 

When you begin to say to yourself or out loud to others (like the police too), “I have my rights!” then begin to express how they have violated those perceived rights may lead to trouble, sometimes very bad trouble. It has been my experience and understanding many of both legal and health like troubles stem from our rights and our belief in those inviolate rights. 

Oh, and the Bill of Rights in a lot of cases is free, free to download and free to download and read via your favorite eReader too! Everything is open to interpretations and everyone’s interpretations are going to differ according to life, culture and beliefs so step lively and don’t assume you have the right to … ???

p.s. Here is one for you, at one time a culture believed wholeheartedly that the husband could beat or kill his wife with impunity. Now, according to your beliefs and rights as either a husband or wife, how would you feel about this one? 

Notes on Graphic:

• Yes, you have the RIGHT to vote; it is a responsibility that should be taken seriously; but you also have the right to NOT vote as well.
• Yes, you have the RIGHT to hold elected office as long as you meet the laws and requirements set forth by law, etc.
• Yes, you have the RIGHT to practice your own religion and you have the responsibility to do so without violating the RIGHTS of others.
• Yes, you have the RIGHT to a fair trial but remember the trial and its officers are human and bound by laws as well as how the legal system truly runs in reality.
• Yes, you have the RIGHT to say what you think in speech or writing as long as you don't violate the RIGHTS of others as well as violate the Rules, Laws and other legally socially binding requirements, etc. 

You see, we all have RIGHTS and we also all have DUTIES and RESPONSIBILITIES that may effect how we perceive, distinguish and apply our RIGHTS, so - BEWARE YOUR RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES. 

I reserver the right to be RIGHT as wells as BEING WRONG, ergo why I wrote my caveat at the start of all this :-)