Geoff Hoon on Question Time?
I seem to remember Geoff Hoon on Question Time saying something like that, about the right to life being the most important right. And what he said gave me the impression that he, and this New Labour government, simply don't understand such sayings as "Live Free or Die".
They seem to think that the right to life - the right not to be killed - is so important, that it must outweigh all other rights and freedoms. But this is just daft, at least if taken simplistically. If we look at what we're left with if we drop all other rights and freedoms in the name of protecting our right to life, we end up finding that the right to life itself is of little, if any, intrinsic value.
The right not to be subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment? Imagine not having that. Your life shall be a living hell. But you won't be killed.
The right not to be enslaved? Imagine not having that. You shall be forced to work for your owners, and worked hard. You will not be working for yourself. But you won't be killed.
The right to liberty, not to be detained? Imagine not having that. You're kept in chains. You're locked up. You're only able to go where your owners want you to go. But you won't be killed.
The right to justice, not to be punished for wrongs you didn't do? Imagine not having that. You'll be punished, severely, for things you might have done, for things you're known not to have done. But you won't be killed.
And so on.
If we only had the right to life, the right not to be killed, we'd be left with a right that has little, if any, value. But without the right to life, we fail to have many of the other rights and freedoms anyway, since we can be denied them simply by being killed.
It's the other rights and freedoms that really give the right to life its value.
And as we salami-slice away those other rights and freedoms, reducing them bit by bit in the name of protecting our right to life, we're actually devaluing the right to life.
Of course, if we do nothing to protect our right to life, our other rights and freedoms can be taken away from us by us being killed. It seems we can't actually protect our rights and freedoms beyond our ability to protect our right to life. While it may therefore be necessary for us to accept unavoidable limits to our other rights and freedoms, we should keep such limitations minimal. If some measure to protect our right to life actually reduces our other rights and freedoms more than the threat to our right to life would without such protection, then the protective measure is simply disproportionate, and should be rejected.
We have the right to have nothing more than minimal protection of our right to life.