Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 26836
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:41 pm

Phil Brooks wrote:
Nebby wrote:On a related subject it pains me that people think of "rights" as opposed to "limits." The Bill of Rights are limitations on government authority, not rights vested in individuals.

Anyway, carry on...


Ugh, I'm so tired of this point being trotted out as some kind of "gotcha." There are two conceptions of rights: positive rights and negative rights. Positive rights are goods and services that the state is required to provide to individuals, while negative rights are things that the state is prohibited from doing to individuals.

Yes, the United States believes only in negative rights and therefore includes only negative rights in the constitution. But this does not mean that positive rights do not exist; in fact every other industrialized country has them.

I'm pretty sure this thread is about the US, though.

User avatar
Nebby
(tagline removed)
Posts: 27740
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

Postby Nebby » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:46 pm

Phil Brooks wrote:
Nebby wrote:On a related subject it pains me that people think of "rights" as opposed to "limits." The Bill of Rights are limitations on government authority, not rights vested in individuals.

Anyway, carry on...


Ugh, I'm so tired of this point being trotted out as some kind of "gotcha." There are two conceptions of rights: positive rights and negative rights. Positive rights are goods and services that the state is required to provide to individuals, while negative rights are things that the state is prohibited from doing to individuals.

Yes, the United States believes only in negative rights and therefore includes only negative rights in the constitution. But this does not mean that positive rights do not exist; in fact every other industrialized country has them.

I know there are two conception of rights. What I don't know is how that is relevant to a discussion of the US constitution, which contains negative rights. Did you just get out of a philosophy 101 lecture and want to drop some knowledge?

Phil Brooks
Posts: 268
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 6:59 pm

Re: Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

Postby Phil Brooks » Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:50 pm

Nebby wrote:
Phil Brooks wrote:
Nebby wrote:On a related subject it pains me that people think of "rights" as opposed to "limits." The Bill of Rights are limitations on government authority, not rights vested in individuals.

Anyway, carry on...


Ugh, I'm so tired of this point being trotted out as some kind of "gotcha." There are two conceptions of rights: positive rights and negative rights. Positive rights are goods and services that the state is required to provide to individuals, while negative rights are things that the state is prohibited from doing to individuals.

Yes, the United States believes only in negative rights and therefore includes only negative rights in the constitution. But this does not mean that positive rights do not exist; in fact every other industrialized country has them.

I know there are two conception of rights. What I don't know is how that is relevant to a discussion of the US constitution, which contains negative rights. Did you just get out of a philosophy 101 lecture and want to drop some knowledge?


It's relevant context to your comment, which said, "The Bill of Rights are limitations on government authority, not rights vested in individuals," and therefore implied that the only rights that exist (and therefore the only rights contained in the Bill of Rights) are limitations on government authority i.e. negative rights.

cavalier1138
Posts: 3532
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

Postby cavalier1138 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:24 pm

Phil Brooks wrote:
Nebby wrote:
Phil Brooks wrote:
Nebby wrote:On a related subject it pains me that people think of "rights" as opposed to "limits." The Bill of Rights are limitations on government authority, not rights vested in individuals.

Anyway, carry on...


Ugh, I'm so tired of this point being trotted out as some kind of "gotcha." There are two conceptions of rights: positive rights and negative rights. Positive rights are goods and services that the state is required to provide to individuals, while negative rights are things that the state is prohibited from doing to individuals.

Yes, the United States believes only in negative rights and therefore includes only negative rights in the constitution. But this does not mean that positive rights do not exist; in fact every other industrialized country has them.

I know there are two conception of rights. What I don't know is how that is relevant to a discussion of the US constitution, which contains negative rights. Did you just get out of a philosophy 101 lecture and want to drop some knowledge?


It's relevant context to your comment, which said, "The Bill of Rights are limitations on government authority, not rights vested in individuals," and therefore implied that the only rights that exist (and therefore the only rights contained in the Bill of Rights) are limitations on government authority i.e. negative rights.


Actually, I'm pretty sure that Nebby just pointed out that the rights in the Bill of Rights are all negative rights (or "limitations", take your pick). No one was discussing the Bill of Rights as the exclusive container of all human rights that anyone could ever enumerate.

User avatar
Nebby
(tagline removed)
Posts: 27740
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

Postby Nebby » Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:36 pm

cavalier1138 wrote:
Phil Brooks wrote:
Nebby wrote:
Phil Brooks wrote:
Nebby wrote:On a related subject it pains me that people think of "rights" as opposed to "limits." The Bill of Rights are limitations on government authority, not rights vested in individuals.

Anyway, carry on...


Ugh, I'm so tired of this point being trotted out as some kind of "gotcha." There are two conceptions of rights: positive rights and negative rights. Positive rights are goods and services that the state is required to provide to individuals, while negative rights are things that the state is prohibited from doing to individuals.

Yes, the United States believes only in negative rights and therefore includes only negative rights in the constitution. But this does not mean that positive rights do not exist; in fact every other industrialized country has them.

I know there are two conception of rights. What I don't know is how that is relevant to a discussion of the US constitution, which contains negative rights. Did you just get out of a philosophy 101 lecture and want to drop some knowledge?


It's relevant context to your comment, which said, "The Bill of Rights are limitations on government authority, not rights vested in individuals," and therefore implied that the only rights that exist (and therefore the only rights contained in the Bill of Rights) are limitations on government authority i.e. negative rights.


Actually, I'm pretty sure that Nebby just pointed out that the rights in the Bill of Rights are all negative rights (or "limitations", take your pick). No one was discussing the Bill of Rights as the exclusive container of all human rights that anyone could ever enumerate.

Yes.

User avatar
landshoes
is that cool?
Posts: 1188
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 2:17 pm

Re: Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

Postby landshoes » Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:34 pm

god you guys really just bought renqhuist's "no positive rights" bullshit hook line and sinker, didn't you

LurkerTurnedMember
Posts: 213
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:31 am

Re: Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

Postby LurkerTurnedMember » Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:48 pm

rpupkin wrote:
jasoncohen wrote:before starting con law my presidency, I was actually excited because I like to know my constitutional rights. I want to know if I give someone people of color, women, and the poor the middle finger, what can happen to me.

But no, it's not about that at all. it's US history and US government all over again. These are 2 subjects that I hate with a passion. I dont care what the congress does. I dont know who thomas jefferson was. I know it's ridiculous but I honestly don't know. I dont know anything about history or government. dont care, dont wanna know.

(Donald Trump)

User avatar
Nebby
(tagline removed)
Posts: 27740
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

Postby Nebby » Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:18 pm

landshoes wrote:god you guys really just bought renqhuist's "no positive rights" bullshit hook line and sinker, didn't you

Tbf Due Process is a hybrid

joebudden
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

Postby joebudden » Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:45 am

I'm actually surprised you're learning about Thomas Jefferson in Con Law.

User avatar
OutCold
Posts: 448
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:57 pm

Re: consitutional law the worst class

Postby OutCold » Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:40 pm

Hikikomorist wrote:Inspires the most/worst class participation, too.

This comment was prescient given the discussion the thread turned into.

User avatar
First Offense
Posts: 6613
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 5:45 pm

Re: Just started con law and I am already starting to hate life

Postby First Offense » Mon Jul 24, 2017 5:19 pm

joebudden wrote:I'm actually surprised you're learning about Thomas Jefferson in Con Law.

Kind of a central figure to Marbury v. Madison.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests