Return-path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS, T_DKIM_INVALID,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Personal-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Delivery-date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 07:45:59 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([192.168.123.127]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PRRd2-0000a8-4P; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 07:44:56 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jbovlaste); Sat, 11 Dec 2010 07:43:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PRRbd-0000Yv-F5 for jbovlaste-real@lojban.org; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 07:43:29 -0800 Received: from mail-qw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.216.53]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PRRbT-0000RK-TF for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 07:43:28 -0800 Received: by qwe5 with SMTP id 5so5497194qwe.40 for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 07:43:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=o2wglKqBZeHH8tPL0MiqWw02d1I9g8m6aMY5eXIzup0=; b=kufysFL8O0pjky23lnEa0rHYxh8pl71ZoS/8FLsnAPCnk8uBd+HSIEVmTQyqzT/+D3 ekTnTdOYOeyj8D64DLMM9hjVnw6M+S1jKoSZGJxfo0rW0wZYiLuaSYHP1ghBMur87v46 DFFD25nTJCbbzR94WaXEkzdjUPJnPBYWCtcuM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=NGlb5b8o+98gSNhi6LsMzUE5lSPU6MYjyU/przeEJkU5yCfRhaFxzyOFkdqsFNY1u6 QAP1qpv1sfcPI35X8fRGEkOEmUwkcYqll12Meb7wEgDH+GsxX7C6Fdp35E0yX/MlTSJX e92c3gFlh5RsqNexXeGIuNFuFW+SRquUL95GY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.241.78 with SMTP id ld14mr1842341qcb.288.1292082193573; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 07:43:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.48.14 with HTTP; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 07:43:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <318531.78321.qm@web88001.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <885332.19254.qm@web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <810610.45148.qm@web88006.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <318531.78321.qm@web88001.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 17:43:13 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: natural and human rights From: "Aviv S." To: jbovlaste@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00163630f8272b279c04972454f4 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: seraviv@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-list: jbovlaste Content-Length: 3947 Lines: 104 --00163630f8272b279c04972454f4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I dont think there is really such a thing as an inalienable right. it is just a custom {tcaci} that dictates such a right, and a custom could be regarded as a type of rule. e.g. "human rights": {loi se jvazi'e be fi lo tcaci be loi remna prami} (zo'o) -or- {fi lo tcacti fo lo remna prami} also: u'u I was missing the x3 place in my previous def. rectified: ko'a jvazi'e ko'e ko'i ko'o .ijo ko'a zifre ko'e tu'a ko'i poi javni ko'e ko'o In inalienable right is not really inalienable in the logical sense of the word. Your inalienable rights can be witheld from you. e.g. by terrorists On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 3:42 PM, A. PIEKARSKI wrote: > > > > > > >How about this: > >The dictionary definition for "right" is: > >"a just claim or title, whether legal, prescriptive, or moral: You have a > right > > >to say what you please." > >So the way I see it - A right is a liberty then is given to you by a > specific > >"rule" (I first wanted to use {flalu} (law) but since it doesn't have to > be a > >legal rule, I chose {javni} which is a more general class than {flalu}). > > > >jvazi'e: x1 has the right to do x2 by power of rule x3 in community/system > x4 > > > >from: > > > >ko'a jvazi'e ko'e ko'i ko'o .ijo ko'a zifre ko'e tu'a lo javni be ko'e bei > ko'o > > > >Therefore, a "right" would be a {lo se jvazi'e} > > > > 'Rights' include 'natural/inalienable rights' among others. What rule > determines > > what natural/inalienable we have? > > totus > > > > --00163630f8272b279c04972454f4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I dont think there is really such a thing as an inali= enable right. it is just a custom {tcaci} that dictates such a right, and a= custom could be regarded as a type of rule.
=A0
e.g. "human rights": {loi se jvazi'e be fi lo tcaci be l= oi remna prami} (zo'o)=A0
-or- {fi lo tcacti fo lo remna prami}
=A0
also: u'u I was missing the x3 place in my previous def. rectified= :
=A0
ko'a jvazi'e ko'e ko'i ko'o .ijo ko'a zifre ko= 'e=A0tu'a ko'i=A0poi=A0javni ko'e ko'o
In inalienable right is not really inalienable in the logical sense of= the word. Your inalienable rights can be witheld from you. e.g. by terrori= sts

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 3:42 PM, A. PIEKARSKI <totus@rogers.com> wrote:

>
>
>How about this:
>The dictio= nary definition for "right" is:
>"a just claim or titl= e, whether legal, prescriptive, or moral: You have a right

>to sa= y what you please."
>So the way I see it - A right is a liberty then is given to you by a sp= ecific
>"rule" (I first wanted to use {flalu} (law) but sin= ce it doesn't have to be a
>legal rule, I chose {javni} which is = a more general class than {flalu}).
>=A0
>jvazi'e: x1 has the right to do x2 by power of rule x3 i= n community/system x4
>=A0
>from:
>=A0
>ko'a jv= azi'e ko'e ko'i ko'o .ijo ko'a zifre ko'e tu'a = lo javni be ko'e bei ko'o
>=A0
>Therefore, a "right" would be a=A0{lo se jvazi'= ;e}
>=A0

'Rights' include 'natural/inalienab= le rights' among others.=A0 What rule
determines

what natural= /inalienable we have?

totus




--00163630f8272b279c04972454f4--