Related Ideas

Review these ideas and then use the BACK key in your browser to return to the page you were on.

Vera's introduction of "equality rights" as opposed to the more traditional liberal "liberty rights" or "non-interference rights" raises many questions. One of the most striking features of recent political debate is the use of the term "right" to trump other legal or moral claims. This is especially true of the debate over hate speech.

For example, in the anthology Striking a Balance there are many references to rights, including the following: the "right to freedom of expression" (viii), the "right not to be a victim of discrimination and prejudice" (1), the "right to non-discriminatory treatment" (44), the "right to be well-informed" (45), and the "right to equality and non-discrimination" (49). These references are taken from many different contexts and may be given various legal and moral underpinnings. The difficulty is that claims to rights have very little content and credibility until they are embedded in a theory of moral and legal rights. It is mainly by testing individual claims within a theory that we can tell whether the claim is justified or merely politically expedient.

Both the supporters of Vera's "equality rights" and the supporters of "liberty rights" (including free expression) need to provide a theory of moral rights in order to bolster their claims.