Folks, you are arguing 'givens.'
If you accept as a basic premise the idea of rights "endowed by their Creator," then you probably wish to see those rights curtailed as minimally as possible and that the social compact of governance should accord to each individual the greatest degree of choice possible without impinging on those same rights for others.
If you don't accept the concept "natural" or "Creator endowed" then you probably believe efforts to preserve them are fatuous, and that the 'greatest good for the greatest number' is the best to be hoped for from the social compact.
But you are arguing givens -- one side asserting "Apples, surely?!" while the other responds "Oranges of course!"
Bookmarks