Thoughts About Rights

RECEIVED Mon., June 21, 2010

Dear Editor,
    I hear the assertion made by Rand Paul and repeated by many in the "tea" movement that the only legitimate functions of government are protection of property, protection of borders, and enforcing contracts. They seem to consider these so self-evident that they do not justify why these are above all the other rights claimed over history. Some claim a right, such as a "right to health care," is an obligation on someone else to provide you with this care and is a seizure of power over this person. The right to own property is exactly the same. A constabulary is established to help you retain/get back your property, a court system with punishments reinforces this right. If we are truly responsible for ourselves, why so much support? Everyone should be armed and know how to defend themselves. Wealthy people would have to act like they have throughout history, and today in much of the world, and hire security. I say only wimps need a nanny state to protect property. I prefer guns and dogs. However, health care seems like a reasonable right to have, at least to patch you up after fighting off intruders!
Tom Cuddy
One click gets you all the newsletters listed below

Breaking news, arts coverage, and daily events

Keep up with happenings around town

Kevin Curtin's bimonthly cannabis musings

Austin's queerest news and events

Eric Goodman's Austin FC column, other soccer news

Information is power. Support the free press, so we can support Austin.   Support the Chronicle