These were NEVER meant to be rights (and that’s a good thing)

As someone who has taken the dive into politics, I have come across a lot of people on both sides who have said things that, in my opinion, are extremely questionable. Both sides believe that certain things are “rights” and therefore demand government intervention thus making the government bigger, more powerful, and yes, more in control of our day-to-day lives. If one side can infringe on the rights of their political opponents, they cheer, but it would only come to bite them back sooner or later.

The number one thing to ask yourself when wondering if something is a right or not is this: Does somebody else have to be willed to do something for another? If the answer is ‘yes,’ then it is not a right, with one exception—the right to an attorney. The reason why this is the exception is simple. When you enter a situation where you have the right to an attorney it is because the government is trying to take away your rights as a citizen. The right to an attorney is a defense against government tyranny. So, with all this in mind, let’s look at a few things that were never meant to be rights.

Abortion

The ‘right’ to an abortion has been a huge topic of discussion in 2022 with the overturning of Roe v. Wade. In Kansas, the Value Them Both bill was voted on to see whether Kansans wanted to consider abortion a ‘right’. Those that voted, overwhelmingly struck the bill down with 59.16 percent of voters going against the bill, making abortion a ‘right’ in the state. What this means is that Kansas tax dollars go to fund abortions in the state. This means whether someone’s religious beliefs prevent them from believing that abortion is okay, they must fund the process against their will via their tax dollars.

Those who are prochoice/proabortion have made the argument that those who are prolife are ‘forcing’ them to birth a child, which isn’t completely true as most women who seek abortions make decisions on their own freewill that lead to the pregnancy to begin with. It would be more accurate to say that those who are prolife are forcing them to keep the pregnancy.

As someone who walks the line of prolife and prochoice, to me, it makes the most sense to allow for abortions up to a certain timeframe, but not having it be a right so if the woman wants an abortion she can still get it but would have to pay for it herself.

Does a person have to be willed to do something for someone else? Yes. An abortionist has to go through the abortion procedure for the woman who requests an abortion. Therefore, it should never be considered a right.

Healthcare

I’ve heard both the left and right talk about how healthcare is a ‘right’ and those that are prochoice/proabortion refer to abortion as “healthcare” which it’s not, and even if it were, it still wouldn’t be a right. Healthcare as a ‘right’ is a big thing in socialist and communist countries. It’s a promise from the government that anyone can receive healthcare no matter how sickly or poor. The problem with this (and this will be a reoccurring trend) is that whenever the government promises a right to something, they often times make that thing worse in the process.

In the U.S., we can see how healthcare as a ‘right’ can work. The pandemic was a great look into the U.S. and how it would function as a socialist/communist country. The “lifesaving” vaccine was not something that you had to pay for, at least not directly. It was something that was provided “for free” by the government. This meant the government had control over who got it and when, and our government made sure to make use of this overreaching power by deciding who got the vaccine based on race rather than based on who was most susceptible to dying from COVID such as the elderly. On top of this, those in government also allow themselves to get special treatment, being seen before others even if someone else is in more need of healthcare.

Does a person have to be willed to do something for someone else? Yes. A doctor must treat a patient. Therefore, healthcare should never be considered a right.

Customer Service

Customer service as a ‘right’ is something that has famously been argued by both sides of the political spectrum to a nauseating degree. A lot of LGBT people have tried suing businesses for not baking their wedding cake. Famously, baker Jack Phillips won his Supreme Court case in 2018, arguing that he sees his cakes as a form of artistic expression and therefore a form of speech. For the Christian baker to be forced to bake the gay wedding cake would go against his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Much like how a tattoo artist has the right to refuse certain tattoos.

More recently, in Florida, Governor DeSantis showed how much of a tyrant he can be to business owners by making it illegal to refuse service to people who refuse to wear a mask or are not vaccinated. Much like how the government should have no power to decide which private businesses are “essential” and which ones aren’t, government should have no power in who private businesses choose to do business with. Either way is an overreaching governmental attack on capitalism. Private businesses should be able to freely decide who they choose to do business with and reap the benefit or suffer the consequence of their decisions because that’s how capitalism works.

Does a person have to be willed to do something for someone else? Yes. A business must provide a service to a customer. Therefore, customer service should never be considered a right.

Education

Perhaps the one that grinds my gears the most is education. Think about it. Is there anything more socialist than kids being sent away from their parents for eight hours a day to get ‘educated’ in a government funded facility where kids pledge their allegiance to the government every morning?

As previously mentioned, when government gets involved, things go from bad to worse, and during the pandemic, things got way worse. Government schools shut down forcing a detrimental gap in kids’ education. This led to an increase in mental health issues, developmental issues, and a major loss in comprehension skills all because a government with way too much power made a blanket decision that would obviously have a negative impact. This is why the fight for school choice is a necessity for a free and prosperous country.

Does a person have to be willed to do something for someone else? Yes. An educator must educate a student. Therefore, education should never be considered a right.

Having Children

I can’t believe that this is one that I have to write about but 2022 has been a special year for all of us. Over in New York (because of course), two gay men are suing the city to gain the ‘right’ to in vitro fertilization (IVF) and surrogacy. Literally, what in the Handmaid’s Tale? They are suing under the guise of the city’s insurance policy, which does not fund fertility treatments to homosexual males, being “discriminatory”.

Does a person have to be willed to do something for someone else? Yes. A woman has to consent to using her body to produce a child for another person. Therefore, having children should never be considered a right.

Housing

Much like education and healthcare, housing is one of those things government has tried and failed to provide for people. Nevertheless, many people still argue in favor of housing as a ‘human right’. The problem with government housing is that it focuses to serve the few at the expense of everyone else. Due to how government housing works, fewer housing units can be made available for people causing uncomfortable living situations due to crowding. Furthermore, government housing is not free. It is paid for by taxes. As taxes rise, paying for other things gets harder to do leading to lower economic opportunities and a lower quality of life. Making housing a ‘right’ sounds nice in theory, but is ultimately detrimental to society.

Does a person have to be willed to do something for someone else? Yes. Taxpayers must take on the burden of paying for the property they provide for the occupants while also paying for their own property without aid. Therefore, housing should never be considered a right.

Conclusion

Rights are essential to a free society, but when they impede on the rights of others, they stop being rights and turn into special privileges for a select few people. People, in my opinion, should be able to get the opportunity to access all that is listed above, but no one should be guaranteed any of the above as that would infringe on the rights of others and create a system ran on tyranny. No truly free society can thrive with government stepping in to provide such things as listed above, and that is a lesson we all need to remember and share.