The same logic also explains why some so-called rights cannot in fact be rights. The God who is the only plausible source of your inalienable rights also happens to be the very same God who tells you, for instance, that abortion is wrong and there are only two sexes. So any talk of a “right”to kill your baby is inherently contradictory.
However, I wonder if even in the Biblical context it’s incorrect to talk about rights.
“Do not commit murder,” for instance, is similar to “You have a right to life,” but it’s not the same thing. There is a subtle, but crucial, difference. The former is about God and how important He is – so important that you have a duty not to profane His creation by destroying what He made in His image. The latter is about you and how important you are. One can, like the medievals, derive the latter from the former and argue that since you are made in the image of God, it is a human rights violation to kill you. That murder, however, would not be a violation of your rights, but God’s.
Does that make any sense? Wrote about it a while ago here:
Thanks for this (and for subscribing, really appreciate it).
I pretty much agree: I've long thought that it's far more helpful (and far more biblical) to speak of "duties" rather than "rights". (Duties would also, btw, flow out of the imago dei, but encourage us to think more about what we should be doing, versus what's *owed* to us).
Reframing things in terms of duties also ...
1) Cuts through issues where "rights" fight against each other; e.g. the abortion issue. Instead of ask "does the right to choose trump the right to life" (the way our culture has gone at it) we could ask: "Who has the greater duty: the woman to the unborn child or the unborn child to its mother?"
2) Helps us think about creation and nature. Rather than go the ludicrous routes of assigning "rights" to rivers and rainforests, we can instead ask: "What are our duties to creation?" That allows us to build a really strong case for environmentalism; but one that actually has a substance to it.
So much in all of this comes back, for me, to Jesus's twofold command: "love God, love neighbour". Orientate ourselves by those two coordinates and go from there!
Thanks for the link to your piece, I'll take a look!
Thank you! It was my duty, if not to creation then at least to you, because The Atheist Who Didn’t Exist is one of my favorite books ever. I’ve given so many copies away, it’s just brilliant, thank you for writing it. That and Berlinski’s The Devil’s Delusion are my top two apologetics books since the CS Lewis days.
I’m currently reading Swallows and Amazons to my kids; between that and your book, we’re trying to bring the Lake District to Texas!
That's really kind of you, Adrian. So glad you liked that book — have you seen the 10th anniversary update BTW? New chapters, fully updated, etc. — and new footnotes in places too :-)
Berlinski's book I enjoyed — he's got a dry wit. I also liked "Darwin's Angel" by John Cornell; that has some laugh out loud moments as well as being a great response to Dawkins etc al.
Bring the Lake District to Texas — great project! (And 'Swallows and Amazons' is a wonderful book. If you love the Lakes, you might enjoy this Terry Abraham's "Life of a Mountain" trilogy:
Thank you for teaching your students about this!
The same logic also explains why some so-called rights cannot in fact be rights. The God who is the only plausible source of your inalienable rights also happens to be the very same God who tells you, for instance, that abortion is wrong and there are only two sexes. So any talk of a “right”to kill your baby is inherently contradictory.
However, I wonder if even in the Biblical context it’s incorrect to talk about rights.
“Do not commit murder,” for instance, is similar to “You have a right to life,” but it’s not the same thing. There is a subtle, but crucial, difference. The former is about God and how important He is – so important that you have a duty not to profane His creation by destroying what He made in His image. The latter is about you and how important you are. One can, like the medievals, derive the latter from the former and argue that since you are made in the image of God, it is a human rights violation to kill you. That murder, however, would not be a violation of your rights, but God’s.
Does that make any sense? Wrote about it a while ago here:
https://gaty.substack.com/p/you-dont-have-rights
Hi Adrian,
Thanks for this (and for subscribing, really appreciate it).
I pretty much agree: I've long thought that it's far more helpful (and far more biblical) to speak of "duties" rather than "rights". (Duties would also, btw, flow out of the imago dei, but encourage us to think more about what we should be doing, versus what's *owed* to us).
Reframing things in terms of duties also ...
1) Cuts through issues where "rights" fight against each other; e.g. the abortion issue. Instead of ask "does the right to choose trump the right to life" (the way our culture has gone at it) we could ask: "Who has the greater duty: the woman to the unborn child or the unborn child to its mother?"
2) Helps us think about creation and nature. Rather than go the ludicrous routes of assigning "rights" to rivers and rainforests, we can instead ask: "What are our duties to creation?" That allows us to build a really strong case for environmentalism; but one that actually has a substance to it.
So much in all of this comes back, for me, to Jesus's twofold command: "love God, love neighbour". Orientate ourselves by those two coordinates and go from there!
Thanks for the link to your piece, I'll take a look!
Thank you! It was my duty, if not to creation then at least to you, because The Atheist Who Didn’t Exist is one of my favorite books ever. I’ve given so many copies away, it’s just brilliant, thank you for writing it. That and Berlinski’s The Devil’s Delusion are my top two apologetics books since the CS Lewis days.
I’m currently reading Swallows and Amazons to my kids; between that and your book, we’re trying to bring the Lake District to Texas!
That's really kind of you, Adrian. So glad you liked that book — have you seen the 10th anniversary update BTW? New chapters, fully updated, etc. — and new footnotes in places too :-)
Berlinski's book I enjoyed — he's got a dry wit. I also liked "Darwin's Angel" by John Cornell; that has some laugh out loud moments as well as being a great response to Dawkins etc al.
Bring the Lake District to Texas — great project! (And 'Swallows and Amazons' is a wonderful book. If you love the Lakes, you might enjoy this Terry Abraham's "Life of a Mountain" trilogy:
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-58394918
You can find bits of it online (YouTube etc.) and the three films on Terry's website I believe.
Yes, I have the 10th anniversary edition, it’s great!
And thank you for the other recommendations, I look forward to reading the Cornell book.