This is something I realized just now, and it's another flaw in HED's argument. He's basing his whole 101, 102, 103, 104, etc, on certain rights specified in the Declaration of Independence, and his argument depends on other people accepting that he has those rights. But on who's authority do those rights exist? Thomas Jefferson and the other authors certainly don't have the authority to declare that those rights exist if HED is correct. More to the point, those rights are illusory; they can be violated at any time and for any reason. There's no magical forcefield that protects someone from having their life taken away, no magical lockpick that allows them to retain their liberty, and so on. Meaning, those aren't actually rights, unless you accept the authority of Thomas Jefferson et al to establish that they are.
It's more than a little bit ridiculous for him to claim that nobody has any authority over him when he's accepting the authority of someone else to declare that he has certain rights in the first place. So which is it, HED? Did Thomas Jefferson and the other writers of the Declaration have the authority to declare that those rights exist, or didn't they?
Do you understand what natural law is? Survival of the fittest...
So for sake of argument, let us presume only you and I are in the world and I want your shirt (or your skin) and I also want 20% of the apples you have in that sack over your shoulder. And let us presume that you and I are equal in ability.
Do you have a right to keep your skin? Do you have a right to keep your apples?
Don't bother to answer, I have some more questions.
Do you have a right to resist my attempt to take your skin?
Do you have a right to resist my attempt to take 20% of your apples?
How about if the roles are reversed and you are after my stuff?Are you going to argue that we are not equal of right?
In observing the demand for me to prove that rights exist, a few posters have suggested since there is no supernatural device to keep me from dying, then I don't have a right to life. The above questions are therefore probative of this argument.