Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It does not matter whether it is a legal right or not when it is so expensive to travel these days. Gas is forecast to rise above $4 a gallon, and even $5, let's not forget tranny fluid at $4 / pop at Wal-Mart (higher at gas stations), and plane tickets? You're asking me to pay $638 / person (well in excess of $2,500 for the whole family) just so I can see my relatives in Florida?
No one has the right to travel (by plane) unless they have their own or something and they follow the air traffic rules. Air travel was created as a corporate entity. If at any point the airlines wanted to shut down their business, they could. What would people say then? Would they say, "I have the right to travel?" No, they wouldn't. So, to me, that kinda is how I feel about being able to travel.
The right to travel and the means to travel are two different topics. We have the right to travel but we may not have the means to travel.
It does not matter whether it is a legal right or not when it is so expensive to travel these days. Gas is forecast to rise above $4 a gallon, and even $5, let's not forget tranny fluid at $4 / pop at Wal-Mart (higher at gas stations), and plane tickets? You're asking me to pay $638 / person (well in excess of $2,500 for the whole family) just so I can see my relatives in Florida?
Since we don't know your relatives in FL, we can't help you there.
I'll book-mark this page, since by your definition and your own admission, health care is not a right, and neither is education or a job.
And based on your whim, not my definition. My take on access to health care being a right or not is against lunatics who believe it ain't. Which side are you on? Heck, I believe that driving is a right. It is fundamental to your freedom to "mobility", deemed a right by many around here.
Quote:
Driving is not the only mode of travel. You can walk, bike, ride an animal, or utilize any number or private or public modes of transportation.
So, you admit that the right to travel is contingent on being dependent on others, and the government can limit your choices to exercise that right.
Quote:
Because driving requires that you personally operate a 2 ton piece of machinery on public highways.
Accountability sire, accountability. One could make the very same argument around guns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003
The right to travel and the means to travel are two different topics.
Slippery slope. Sort of like, you've the right to own a gun but not to use it.
the state grants the privilege to operate a motor vehicle on public roads. the federal government grants the privilege to fly an airplane in US airspace, with restrictions of course. the states grant the privilege of operating a motor boat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
And based on your whim, not my definition. My take on access to health care being a right or not is against lunatics who believe it ain't. Which side are you on? Heck, I believe that driving is a right. It is fundamental to your freedom to "mobility", deemed a right by many around here.
the constitution does give the right to travel. it does NOT give the right to operate a motor vehicle. you can walk, ride a horse if you can afford to buy one, ride a bicycle, again if you can afford to buy one, but if the state says you cannot drive a car, then if you get caught driving one, you suffer the consequences. same with flying an airplane. again travel is a right, the mode of travel on the other hand, beyond walking, is a privilege.
Quote:
So, you admit that the right to travel is contingent on being dependent on others, and the government can limit your choices to exercise that right.
the only mode of travel that is not limited is walking. if you are required to have a license to operate legally any other mode of transportation, then yes the government CAN limit your choices. you do not have the right to travel by bus, automobile, airplane, or various other modes of transportation.
Quote:
Accountability sire, accountability. One could make the very same argument around guns.
Slippery slope. Sort of like, you've the right to own a gun but not to use it.
except the constitution specifically states that the people have the right o keep and bear arms. and yes there are laws against discharging said firearms without reason. cant shoot a firearm into the air just because for instance, but you can go to a firing range, and shoot targets to your hearts content, or until you run out of bullets, targets, or money to be on the range. or if someone threatens you, you can use a firearm to defend yourself within reason.
The majority of People recognize that safety is important, and that we must take into consideration the least experienced motor vehicle operator, the least skilled motor vehicle operator, and the least confident motor vehicle operator. For that reason, the People have enacted laws to ensure safety on highways for the wide range of People who use them, including pedestrians and cyclists, and the privilege to operate a motor vehicle on public highways is granted on the condition that motor vehicle operators obey and respect motor vehicle laws.
Likewise the People recognize that air safety is important, and we can't have planes falling out of the sky onto school playgrounds killing children, because some idiot thought he could fly a plane after reading a Tom Clancy novel.
Granting privileges....
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
And based on your whim, not my definition. My take on access to health care being a right or not is against lunatics who believe it ain't.
Health care is not a right and your position is frivolous, inconsistent and contradictory, which is what you'd expect from a Liberal.
According to you, in the year 10,000 BCE, no one had the right to travel, since no mechanical methods of travel existed, and indeed, there were no domesticated animals such as horses to use for travel. That, of course, is absurd.
The right to travel is innate and a function of human existence. The mode of travel is not. An automobile is neither innate nor a function of human existence. You can can surely survive without a car. I do. And not having a car does not in anyway restrict my travel. I pay $10 and ride the Megabus from Cincinnati to Chicago.
I am under no obligation to fund your travel. That is part and parcel of life-style (just like health care) which I have no obligation to subsidize either.
If you want health care, then might I suggest canceling your Cable TV and using that money for your health. It is not a difficult choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Which side are you on?
The side of Reason, Logic and Sanity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Heck, I believe that driving is a right.
It is not. It is a privilege that can be revoked if you demonstrate irresponsibility and bad decision making.
I have no problem applying the same standard to firearms.
The right to self-defense is innate and a function of human existence, but that does not necessarily apply to the means of self-defense. A hand-gun is not the only tool available for self-defense. There are many others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
So, you admit that the right to travel is contingent on being dependent on others, and the government can limit your choices to exercise that right.
No, I admit that there are many modes of travel, and I admit that the People vis-a-vis the government may regulate some modes for the safety of all.
As an ultra-conservative, I am naturally concerned for the safety of my family and the people in my community. You as a liberal have no concern for the safety of others, and your motto is "If it feels good, do it" and if something goes wrong you expect to be absolved of all responsibility and the financial burden and costs should be shouldered by everyone else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Accountability sire, accountability. One could make the very same argument around guns.
Health care is not a right and your position is frivolous, inconsistent and contradictory, which is what you'd expect from a Liberal.
I think you were better off bookmarking, along with this idiocy that I expect from the typical right winger. Have you made up your mind yet, on whether access to health care is a right or not? As I recall, you switched back and forth, just as you’ve started again.
Quote:
According to you, in the year 10,000 BCE, no one had the right to travel, since no mechanical methods of travel existed, and indeed, there were no domesticated animals such as horses to use for travel. That, of course, is absurd.
Absurd would be a great word to define your argument. Since when have rights been contingent on the media? That only select media could be used for a right, or some other media could be defined a privilege even if it were a way to exercise that right? As a liberal/progressive, I have a stand… driving is a right, and so is travel. Am I clear?
Quote:
I am under no obligation to fund your travel. That is part and parcel of life-style (just like health care) which I have no obligation to subsidize either.
You surrender your whining about obligations when you choose to live in a society whose benefits you chose to share with others.
Quote:
The side of Reason, Logic and Sanity.
It is great to have a high opinion of self, ain’t it?
Quote:
It is not. It is a privilege that can be revoked if you demonstrate irresponsibility and bad decision making.
You privilege to a lot of rights can be revoked, if you demonstrate irresponsibility and bad decision making. Learn about it.
Quote:
I have no problem applying the same standard to firearms.
From what I see, you do. See above.
Quote:
As an ultra-conservative, I am naturally concerned for the safety of my family and the people in my community. You as a liberal have no concern for the safety of others…
An ultra-conservative BS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
the constitution does give the right to travel. it does NOT give the right to operate a motor vehicle. you can walk, ride a horse if you can afford to buy one, ride a bicycle, again...
Please wait while I lookup the references to bicycle, horse and motor vehicle in the Constitution... or do you happen to have a quick link to back up this (until then) crap?
I think you were better off bookmarking, along with this idiocy that I expect from the typical right winger. Have you made up your mind yet, on whether access to health care is a right or not? As I recall, you switched back and forth, just as you’ve started again.
Absurd would be a great word to define your argument. Since when have rights been contingent on the media? That only select media could be used for a right, or some other media could be defined a privilege even if it were a way to exercise that right? As a liberal/progressive, I have a stand… driving is a right, and so is travel. Am I clear?
You surrender your whining about obligations when you choose to live in a society whose benefits you chose to share with others.
It is great to have a high opinion of self, ain’t it?
You privilege to a lot of rights can be revoked, if you demonstrate irresponsibility and bad decision making. Learn about it.
From what I see, you do. See above.
An ultra-conservative BS.
Please wait while I lookup the references to bicycle, horse and motor vehicle in the Constitution... or do you happen to have a quick link to back up this (until then) crap?
Access to health care absolutely is a right. Everyone in the country currently has access to health care. How provide for it (pay for it, get to a hospital, etc.) is not a right. That is an individual responsibility. No one is legally barred from receiving health care today...
We can argue with Mircea on that. Good to see you in my world, BTW.
Quote:
Everyone in the country currently has access to health care. How provide for it (pay for it, get to a hospital, etc.) is not a right. That is an individual responsibility. No one is legally barred from receiving health care today...
Only because of a welfare system put in place, by Reagan. If anything, people who chant the most about personal responsibility should be shouting the most against any such idea, however. Yet, it is them who seems to be appreciative of this social welfare/entitlement in place. Why is that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
