Does a person have right to education and healthcare

Do they? Even if they cant afford it.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=nrT0kBeld3Q
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

only white people

Those are rights which demand material, even sillier than normal rights. A "right to healthcare" costs money. But rights to free speech and firearm ownership are free.

Rights don't exist

Is it in the Constitution?

No

People don't actually have "rights" beyond what they are willing to secure with violence. What you consider "rights" (education, health care) are actually privileges or luxuries provided by wealth.

If he's a member of the tribe and can be of use to the tribe, not foreign niggers.

Only right wing white Christians who have served in either the military, important public service (police, firefighters, ambulance, etc;) or in the meme wars.

it depends. education can be seen as a investment which overall benefits society. less so for healthcare though.

i mean, assuming you're in the workforce, its better to be healthy, alive, and contributing rather than dead.

Firearms cost money though burger boi.

HUH?

If you have a right to something then someone else has an obligation to work for it.

Only to the most basic one, even if they can't afford it, their knowledge and health will pay to society in the future.

Everyone already has the right to health care and the right to education on almost all countries. You have the right to get to yourself as much health care services as you want, as long as you respect the rights of others.

Government health care is not a "right". You don't have the right to plunder people to get better health care for you. You don't have the right to steal to pay for your education.

do you have a right to force other people to pay for your bullshit and lack of insurance?

plot twist
yes, be good goys

You are free to possess guns, but you're not given free firearms

youtube.com/watch?v=nrT0kBeld3Q

this is the distinct difference, a negative right versus a positive right. a negative right means you can't be interfered with, a positive right means intervention must take place to ensure and pay for things like healthcare

yes but we're not taxed to purchase every American an arsenal of firearms

>education
Yes
>welfare
No

Nobody has the right to anything they can not afford. Using this logic, the government has to provide me with a gun because we have the second amendment

Some people should have the right to be shipped back to Africa.

people have the right to both. same thing with guns you have the right to own a gun doesnt mean you can go down to the local gun store and demand free guns. just because you have the right to it doesnt mean you can have it for free

>right
No.

That said, it's in a nation's interest to educate its citizens, hence why public school's exist.
Healthcare should be a little more choosy, someone who needs care due to their own choices such as heart failure resulting from morbid obesity should not be allowed to be treated on taxpayer money.

It's an investment I think we can agree on. However, the way that it is being handled is absolutely disgusting and counterproductive.

If they can't afford it, no. It's their fault.

this question can only be answered "yes" if you agree that Theft is moral and a good thing.

If the question was "should we care for the poor and donate to charities" then the answer can be yes without turning into an animalistic thug.

Big difference. Most people cannot grasp this concept.

>Do I have a right to force someone to provide me with something?
[No]

It`s a basic right protected under Int`l law

does not answer the question. Laws are arbitrary enforced opinions, not the manifestation of ethical "good" preference.

Legislation does not dictate morality.

It does actually

Example: 3 people in a room, 2 men, 1 woman. Democratic referendum "we gonna rape the woman or not?" - result: YES. Woman gets raped. Moral or immoral?

So if the Canadian government decides to pass a law imprisoning all Japanese and Italians in the country because we're at war with them, then that's totally fine and no reparations would be necessary after the fact, right?

Yes. If you're suggesting it should only be for the elite you can go fuck yourself.

Rights are a social construct and can only be defined in a system of authority. Naturally, the system of authority would be the one to define these "rights".

If you are referring to the government of the United States of America, the rights you mention are already existent. Every American has the opportunity to attend a school and get treatment from medical facilities. Whether or not they can pay for these services is completely up to them, as everyone has the ability to earn money.

High spoken memes aside, coddling people with free shit isn't going to make them work any harder. People are lazy and encouraging their laziness just breeds more lazy people.

right to education only exists to push propaganda into the minds of children.

right to healthcare only exists to slurp funds from the pockets of taxpayers to line the pockets of politicians.

The general theme of equality is to bring everybody down to the lowest common denominator so nobody gets reminded they're a fat, slobby, unsuccessful loser because they're all sweeties who can't handle the truth.