And before they were rights encoded in law were they rights?
I feel it makes your claim weaker to go from "should have" to "is a right" if there's any doubt in it.
There's strong "we have a right to ancillary thing" arguments you can make that rely on a right, but those rely on that right being a given, not the premise
And before they were rights encoded in law were they rights?
I feel it makes your claim weaker to go from "should have" to "is a right" if there's any doubt in it.
There's strong "we have a right to ancillary thing" arguments you can make that rely on a right, but those rely on that right being a given, not the premise