<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>The Modern Regime of Rights</title>
		<description>Comments for The Modern Regime of Rights at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 7 out of 7 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 17:17:14 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-modern-regime-of-rights.html#comment-6685</link>
			<description>And then we have Justice Scalia's take on &quot;rights&quot;:

&quot;The very enumeration of the right takes out of the hands of government -- even the Third Branch of Government -- the power to decide on a case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth insisting upon.&quot;

In other words, once you declare something as a &quot;right&quot; -- no law, judge, administrative guideline, policy or rule should be allowed to stand in opposition to the so-called &quot;right.&quot; 

Who chooses what constitutes a &quot;right&quot; then becomes critical.  I had a debate with a canon lawyer in our local Bishop's office who released a document supporting so-called &quot;immigrant worker's rights&quot; and their &quot;right to medical care.&quot; This diocesan leader felt her determination of so-called rights were without question and needed to be protected not as a course of law, but as a fundamental Christian right (read: above the law).  

When I asked whether the lawyer would support the &quot;right&quot; of a woman to receive medical care as the woman saw fit -- specifically if it was acceptable to have her &quot;right to medical care&quot; be enough to force her doctor to perform an abortion, even if the doctor was against abortions -- the person's eyes opened and understood the idea that callously assigning &quot;rights&quot; to whatever was the topic-de-jour was suicidal to the Church long-term.  - AveMaria</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 09:36:22 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-modern-regime-of-rights.html#comment-6684</link>
			<description>This was a chilling article indeed, but not something unknown to me. These truths must be made known to more people, or else, how can we avoid a future built by our mad modern regime? And yes, it most certainly is mad. - Aeneas</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 10:38:45 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-modern-regime-of-rights.html#comment-6683</link>
			<description>In the Papal tradition of ‘human’ or ‘natural’ rights in the field of social justice, one should not overlook the explosive expansion of the scope and meaning of human rights created by John XXIII in his encyclical Pacem in Terris.  There, in paragraphs 11 through 27 he created at least 17 new human ‘rights’ out of whole cloth. And in Mater et Magistra the same pope pushed for wealth redistribution and the shift of responsibility for the promotion of the common good from individuals to the government, from charity to taxation, from a moral responsibility to a legal obligation. The role of individual and subsidiarity charity gives way to the government as the primary implementer of social services. Paul VI continued his predecessor’s ideas and stressed that the energy of change should move from the economic sector to the political sector to bring about these socialist changes.

One of the results of these moves by Popes John XXIII and Paul VI is that when everything is made a ‘human’ right, the value of rights diminishes and their foundation in the natural law is weakened, if not obliterated.

May 15 will be the 120th anniversary of Rerum Novarum. Is it too much to hope for that Benedict XVI will issue his own decennial commemorative encyclical that brings Catholic teaching back to the principles of Leo XIII?
 - senex</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 08:03:04 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-modern-regime-of-rights.html#comment-6682</link>
			<description>As the penumbra of tyranny approaches, long before the state feels compelled to resort to force (for the public good of course) language is first insulted and then pushed around. Reason cannot stand. All of the ironic quotes in the excellent article above illustrate how far we have come. The signs of trouble are many, too many to list. They include caprice passing for law and decree passing for representation. Those who seem to notice are few and many of them seem to be Catholic. In the face of a kind of general madness that can’t possibly turn out well for human dignity, we should never underestimate the value of prayer.    - Other Joe</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 08:00:52 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-modern-regime-of-rights.html#comment-6680</link>
			<description>I am reminded of all the peoples throughout history who did &quot;notice&quot; one or another ominous trend and were witnesses to destruction of all they cherished.  Can a catastrophe be averted here?  With the readers of thecatholicthing, I pray that it can be. - Ars Artium</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 03:11:06 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-modern-regime-of-rights.html#comment-6679</link>
			<description>Excellent exposition. Perhaps another huge flaw with the &quot;modern regime of rights&quot; is the apparent absence of any sense of personal responsibility attached to those rights. - Mark</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 02:03:59 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-modern-regime-of-rights.html#comment-6678</link>
			<description>Insightful! - joe</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 01:25:00 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
