The Right to Keep and Bear Arms vs. Natural Rights.
What seems conspicuous to me is the omission of the very basic "natural rights" ("natural right"--a basic right that ensures that an individual can function properly as a member of the society) in the Constitution, particularly the omission of the right to sleep.
If one is deprived of this basic right, one stops functioning properly--being deprived of sleep, people can no longer think clearly for themselves after a few sleepless nights and become a burden on the society. A prolonged deprivation of sleep can drive people mad and not fully responsible for their actions.
One could think at first that the right to sleep should be included in the Constitution (who would want to have people around who cannot think clearly, and who might even become fully mad?), especially seeing that the right to keep and bear arms is included. After all, some people can go without keeping and bearing arms for very long periods of time without any discernible signs of any damage (either mental, or physical), which is not the case when the natural right to sleep is not being observed.
What's up?
What would happen if the right to sleep would be guaranteed?
I, personally, think that a very interesting scenario would evolve; one that would affect the whole world in a very significant way. I think that if this right would be guaranteed, this alone would result in a much more relaxed and much more sustainable human society globally.
Please share your thoughts on the subject!
Thank you, Hearthstone - ModelEarth.Org .
|
