man as such
Man as such, understanding the concept with inherent dignity can not be subject to compliance with all their basic needs by the state. This means that since men differ in their tastes, abilities, lifestyles and aspirations, there is no fixed concept of basic needs specific to each (the general concept can talk about food, education, health and housing, for example, but this varies from man to man). Therefore, filling the basic needs of the generality of men, build on an arbitrary decision by the ruler of the state would determine based on a general notion (given the impossibility of seeing each individual case of men), what people need or yes, for men as such, with respect for their dignity. That is, the man with dignity based on the fulfillment of basic needs, is too broad a concept that leaves plenty of room for arbitrary decisions of government concerning its definition and scope and intrusiveness. With respect to men, also create the context of arbitrariness in their claims to the state agency responsible for the satisfaction of needs: someone could claim as a need to be covered, but the State would not conceiving as a man with inherent dignity, even the smallest points that make your existence, convenience and comfort, and successfully include that particular need within the general concept of needs. That is, within the State's obligation to supply, demand better food in terms of quality, or more of the same, inside the housing requirement, better home, for example with two floors and most rooms because his family is enlarged and the house already seems small. On the other hand, and therefore the claim of a man for improvements, would lead to the awakening of the other men and also to claim these for improvements, and so each would claim various improvements, according to their own opinions, and not only that the State would lose its general concept of needs because it would gradually deforming the varied demands of different people, but would have to cover more and more aspects of life the person involved and meddle more, give more things, and how it would collect more taxes to taxpayers to meet new needs or the depth of the old women who started a claim for improvements. Not all men need the same, or may be determined from the rule that everyone needs. Only the man himself knows what he needs and what makes him happy. It is therefore unfair to charge you more Men taxes for the state to attend to the claims of others, would not need to work towards the sustenance of life, but simply claim that the state and give away what they ask, because their duty was to cover basic needs, but would not consider its citizens as beings with dignity. Man is man
whatever their needs, and state their needs, covered or not covered. The fair that the state allow people to build their own path to happiness, to the satisfaction of their own unique needs, and above all, was installed in the society the culture of work (for man produce and to sustain itself) and not the gift culture (welfarism total and growing by a state does opt for the option of the claim and not work). Therefore, the state should not conceptualize the person as such only when their needs are met, based on an arbitrary basis. The State should be the insurer of opportunities for the man who recognizes his own needs and aspirations, to cover what you want. The state has the task of ensuring the freedom of man. Freedom is the fundamental human right, and from which, identifying their own tastes and desires, build your way to happiness and self-sustainability (allowing you to live with dignity, and depend itself, no state gift taxes are paid by others, who are restricted in his freedom thereby contributing excessively to meet others' needs, and replacement at the notion of work for the claim, generates a vicious circle for to perpetuate the situation and widen more and more). Thus the state should not walk covering such needs to maintain the status of the dignity of its citizens, but must consider the dignity of citizens and ensure their freedom, for it is he who freely identify what you want and go on your search. That dignity is not subject to the arbitrariness of the ruler, but the fundamental right of all citizens and their concomitant right to choose what they want and work for it. Necessary correlate of the right to liberty is the right to private property of citizens, starting with being the owner of his own body, and thus choosing their mode of action, and following to be the owner of the fruits of their labor, than it acquires, manages and maintains in order to generate self-sustaining framework enabling it to develop a free life. The right to property based on the right to freedom, allows the man to choose, develop and rely on yourself, and make their living in harmony with their tastes and possessions. Ezequiel
Eiben
01/24/2010 
0 comments:
Post a Comment