Megan McArdle discusses liberal outrage to the Hobby Lobby ruling as follows. In this context, “Do what you want, as long as you don’t try to force me to do it, too” works very well, which is why this verbal formula has had such a long life. But when you introduce positive rights into the picture, this abruptly stops working. You have a negative right not to have your religious practice interfered with, and say your church forbids the purchase or use of certain forms of birth control. If I have a negative right not to have my purchase of birth control interfered with, we can reach a perhaps uneasy truce where you don’t buy it and I do. But if I have a positive right to have birth control purchased for me, then suddenly our rights are directly opposed: You have a right not to buy birth control, and I have a right to have it bought for me, by you. That’s a very good point. It’s why positive rights ultimately mean the elimination of all rights, not just religious freedoms. It turns everyone into agents of the state who have state obligations to other people. And this is where she stumbles a bit.
Posted on: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:25:16 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015