Craven de Kere wrote:
Been there done that.
The rights are 'alienable', we wish they weren't, societies need to secure the rights but idealism that sees rights as some mysterious inborn power gets in the way by interpreting it in a magical way that does not credit societal structures.
Well, there are those who would interpret inherent rights in a "magical way" by ascribing them to divine provenance. There are others, on the other hand, who view certain rights as inherent by virtue of one's humanity, not by virtue of one's status as a creation of God. For instance, the preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
states that "recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world." Nothing magical or mysterious there.
I can, therefore, understand criticism of inherent rights if such rights could only
be derived from some grant by a superior being. But then I would need some evidence to convince me that there is naught but a metaphysical basis for inherent rights.