I'm not sure that I agree. You're saying that if there are no natural rights, then governments can do anything to people.
I'm not sure about that. It assumes that the only way to put moral limits on what government can do is by using
natural rights. Is that true? Most people throughout western history have not thought in terms of natural rights. That way of
understanding morality is a fairly recent one. Other possibilities
include thinking in terms of virtue or of cultivating the good, however we understand that to be defined.
I think that we can argue against abuses by government with or without a theory of natural individual rights.
|