their material absence of their essence. More specifically to our discussion, and to an earlier point, no, i'd argue inalienable rights by definition cannot be violated. That's what inalienable means. Their constant, consistent alienation is a compelling argument against their inalienability. I underatand the argument to the fact that they *ought* to be enshrined, but arguing that we currently posess them is magical thinking.
[@sz_duras](https://mastodon.online/@sz_duras )
fear is not a Weltanschauung
npub1u0…f7jlx
2026-01-23 00:00:50 UTC
in reply to nevent1q…6nej
Author Public Key
npub1u026ztty3m0ytkpjll70saawds48fk7t5sl3werqjzm7dnl7stvqvf7jlxSeen on
wss://relay.momostr.pinkPublished at
2026-01-23 00:00:50 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "9ca603e1df9e173d3f32a25416f621596e08db4e9534c56e1dd3f8a027e470b2",
"pubkey": "e3d5a12d648ede45d832fffcf877ae6c2a74dbcba43f17646090b7e6cffe82d8",
"created_at": 1769126450,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"c788250b6b533dd816e31a0674a1408ae769e7ec4884be3df8cb4f55e675611d",
"",
"reply",
"e3d5a12d648ede45d832fffcf877ae6c2a74dbcba43f17646090b7e6cffe82d8"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://zirk.us/@wouldinotcallmyselfahumanbeing/115941471031601942",
"web"
],
[
"e",
"54b5c40bfc634745016f4116ca17140829a94c51729805668ac8a24e1a8f76e4",
"",
"root",
"563c984744bf063bdfad99ae51118cdffe3721e819453c4a388071ac88209e8b"
],
[
"p",
"e3d5a12d648ede45d832fffcf877ae6c2a74dbcba43f17646090b7e6cffe82d8"
],
[
"p",
"563c984744bf063bdfad99ae51118cdffe3721e819453c4a388071ac88209e8b"
],
[
"p",
"5cb8bede5df7b0eb97f149c8442b903a1392abc2bfec571fc985bdf72aa5894c"
],
[
"p",
"590f014d14ad94ad89b8565872089edfb03f1a86ea588918a87c30d6c2aaccdf"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://zirk.us/users/wouldinotcallmyselfahumanbeing/statuses/115941471031601942",
"activitypub"
],
[
"L",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"l",
"pink.momostr.activitypub:https://zirk.us/users/wouldinotcallmyselfahumanbeing/statuses/115941471031601942",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"-"
]
],
"content": "their material absence of their essence. More specifically to our discussion, and to an earlier point, no, i'd argue inalienable rights by definition cannot be violated. That's what inalienable means. Their constant, consistent alienation is a compelling argument against their inalienability. I underatand the argument to the fact that they *ought* to be enshrined, but arguing that we currently posess them is magical thinking. \n[@sz_duras](https://mastodon.online/@sz_duras )",
"sig": "107271133cb63286a3b37a95a692fdae46003caaa6cec90279d24068fdc0adf59c0154e2118cf91463de8470d81b643fbc223b7bb689cd69605ff3c65b21bcf0"
}