What do you value more: The rights of the society or the rights of the individual?

Question

Do the laws you would like to see in place protect the rights of the society over the rights of the individual or vice versa?

Answer 1

Protecting the rights of each individual will allow for the greatest benefit to society.

Answer 2

I feel that a nice balance should be established, for complete priority of one would inevitably cause the downfall of the other, would it not? The rights of a society should be BASED on the continuation of the individuals as a WHOLE, for focusing on the commonwealth is the POINT of societies at all. Laws are essentially planks of a 'citizen bridge' that each individual chooses to step on, thereby validating Franklin's quote of citizenship being a implicit contract a person establishes.

Answer 3

I value the rights of the individual. If you were to go by the rights of 'society' (even if it were possible), you end up with a mob mentality that means the rights of certain groups are at the whim of everyone else. For example, look at any minority group...say smokers. If you wanted to go by group rule, you could say that because they are not good for society as a whole, they should all get the death penalty. Since they are in the minority and have no individul rights...bye bye.

By giving everyone individual rights that have to be respected, you end up with a society that has it's rights set at a reasonable level for everyone most of the time.

Answer 4

Given the way that I see debate going for the last several years, I value the POWER of government more than I value the rights of individuals. I have also been influenced to this point of view by Mary Ann Glendon's book "Rights Talk," published in 1991.

Answer 5

I believe we have seen the effects of individual rights being used time and again by fanatics and idiots to trample on everyone elses rights as a society. Think of a persons rights to freedom of speech that lets crackpots promote the denial of the holocaust, the kkks' right to free assembly and so on, even though society as a whole would not condone these actions, beliefs or rhetoric. How often have we read or heard of mothers forcing boy scouts to accept their daughters even though as a society we all know it is the idea of an idiot claiming her right to admit the girls. We concern ourselves so much with trying to uphold everyones rights that society itself becomes the victim.

Answer 6

I think the rights of Society is where we will have to move towards today in order to have a successful future. The rights of the individual will need to be second. In this day in time families have a television set in every room, so that everyone can watch what they want when they want. This set up does not provide the cohesive inter-related structure of a family. Learned behavior is "I got my tv you watch yours." If the indivdual rights exceed the family's rights you only have a family by name. We have many examples of this before us. Many musical artists of every genre fit this description and it winds up the lyrics of a hit song.

To futher bring my point into focus.
The concept of Capitalism fits the aforementioned illustration of everyone in the family having their own tv. Ultimately, we cannot have a society if capitalism's approach to society is the individual's means to an end.

If you read the whole law, written by some of the greatest minds the Universe has ever seen. Pick a subject matter in The U.S. Constitution and related amendments. Technology has caused us to exceed the dated prose of this nation's founding Fathers. As beautiful and sermonic as they may seem, they have reached their limits when it comes to individual rights. Hold up Ben Franklin's complicit understanding of individual rights as mentioned by a previous response, hold that next to the Patriot Act.

At some point we must have a gravitational pull towards a more complete benchmark that builds on the Judeo-Christian heritage with the dexterity to include, love thy neighbor as thyself...even if they are Musilum, Republican, Pagan etc. Why? Because that is what we have gone to war to defend, throughout the history of the United States of America. Someome must garner the moral courage to make a modern day edict, as for me and my house we will SERVE the _______.

And so, I leave you with this thought. Laws should be used to SERVE the public. Instruments designed to uphold the best and highest traditions of humanity. They should protect us from insidious behaviors that would maime and hurt a person because of their religion, color of their skin, age etc. Societal rights are not synonymous to majority opinion and rights. Societal Rights by definition are the base line principles that we all have a complicit understanding and agreement to operate by and under for the good of the whole. No different than a functional family. A functional family does not lean on socialism. Those that do, have children who never grow up. Never have a place of their own. A functional family wants everyone to get an education, make an honest living, be a good citizen and make a contribution to society. Right now, the laws protect us against ourselves and seeks to prove and disprove who is culpable on a given day. The Justice meted out is then measured by a monetary reward or cost. Surely, those who penned all of the historical documents that we have revered from the Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence from the brain trust of the Continental Congress to this Congress; surely it was never intended to use the law to turn on ourselves like an inward knife, stabbing the flesh and bleeding the democracy we so dearly love and fight for. Like an Entymologist peering through a microscope, with that same fascination it's time we look at our commitment to make money the top priority over all else. Like an Astronomer gazing at the distant stars magnified 1000x over we must take a hard look at where we are headed with our collective selves. It is for these reasons society should be better balanced over the rights of the individual.

My last thought. A model of what I am speaking about would be Private Golf Clubs, Private Schools, Private Investement Clubs that require an application to enter. The public needs more than the minimum, just like the Private sector insists on a greater expectation and commitment from it's members to be a part of society we need to do the same. Mind you, it is possible to join these ranks by who you know and s/he being able to vouch for your conduct and character as a person based on their conduct and character. These are clear examples where society rights are balanced with individual rights and Capitalism is in the mix but does not rule the day. Anyone who has joined a Fraternity, Sorority, Coven, Temple, Mosque or Church. Anyone who is a part of a Cause, Party, Gang member or Committee would all agree to my point or they would have never become a member.

Answer 7

Societies don't have rights. Governments don't have rights. Corporations don't have rights (even though they're granted them by law).

Only individuals have rights.

Answer 8

The individual. A single person is the smallest, least represented minority in any society.

Answer 9

It would have to be the rights of society....
ie: Timothy McVeigh's "rights" killed people, but society's rights killed him to remove him from normal people who believe in live and let live.
The laws in place protect no one.
Laws punish lawbreakers.
God's commandment Thou shalt not kill commands ME not to murder YOU, but it also commands YOU not to murder ME.
But laws cannot change or guide, but they do PUNISH if you are found.
If you're not found, the "powers that be" (conscience and all that is holy) God ordained will chase you down until you are destroyed.
I

Answer 10

the rightsof the individual are the most important thing