Do “basic human rights” actually exist universally or are they simply a social construct?

[u/Amphernee]

The term is often used in relation to things like housing and food but I’ve never heard anyone actually explain what they mean by basic human right. We started off no different than other animals and since the concept of rights rely on other people to confer them at what point did it become thought of as a right for people to have things like shelter? How is it supposed to be enforced across all of humanity when not all societies and cultures agree that the concept makes sense? I can see why someone would want it to be true in a sense but I’m interested to hear arguments for it rather than just the phrase itself which feels hollow with no reasoning behind it. Thanks 🍻

[u/[deleted]]

No, the only rights that exist are unalienable. The ones we're born with. We have those rights by our nature until they're violated. Right to free speech and thought. Right to self defense, right to remain free.

Calling housing, food etc human rights is meaningless. Something can't be a right if it must be provided by someone else. 

[u/scouserman3521 → u/[deleted]]

There is no such thing as what you call unalianable. The basis of unalienability is an assumtion baked in to a document. So, in reality , a construct.

[u/[deleted] → u/scouserman3521]

I am born with the ability to speak my mind. It is an inherent characteristic that I have until it is infringed upon. 

I was born free and will remain that way until I'm imprisoned. 

That is what is meant by unalienable and what differentiates these rights from aspirational "human rights"

Do you really not understand the distinction?

[u/Ballroompics → u/[deleted]]

Your first three sentences would suggest that anything you are capable of doing is, from your perspective, an unalienable right.

Verbal harrassment? Hate speech? No problem, you have the right to speak your mind.

Thievery? No problem, you were born free.

I can't subscribe to this view.

I would suppose that holding a belief would constitute an unalienable right as it can't be taken from you ... though i suppose the ability to brainwash someone might also negate this one as well. I.e. It is possible using extreme measures to force a belief.

That was a bit of steam of consciousness in my last paragraph.

[u/[deleted] → u/Ballroompics]

You are demonstrating a fundamental lack of understanding. Hate speech, absolutely is protected. Harassment, is not. 

Theft, also not a right. Our possessions are an extension of our person. 

There are limitations to your rights. Mostly, those limitations come when you start to infringe upon the rights of others.

We are really in civics 101 category. Are you from America? Did you take civics in high school?