Quote:
Originally Posted by lyghtningrod";p="
Quote:
Originally Posted by nawbut";p="
but y'know what? you have forced me to take a critical look at it...and it is flawed. I would prefer (now!) if it read, 'one can not legitimately lay claim to rights for oneself that one would withold from another.'
A bit better?
|
I forced you? Ah, no, say not that I did violence on you. Say that my words caused you to look at the statement. I abjure force.
I accept your alteration, but wonder if it is not just gilding the lily. I can't legitimately claim a right to myself and reject the same right for another. My objection is not in terms of content, but of using the fewest words to get the point across. I hate to insult the reader's intelligence. |
...I felt compelled (through no external pressures), say?
I would share with you the aim of being as concise as possible. But I do think that the inclusion of the qualification "legitimately" is vital to the proper sense of the sentence. I could, conceivably, claim any right to myself; the right to butter your toast and eat it while you starved - but I could not legitimately do so if I lay claim to a right for human sustenance for myself.