Péter Aich, an employee of Felvidék.ma, pondered. Among other things, whether it should be declared that the water is wet and that the parent is always female. Even if you think of yourself as a man.

"When I hear about rights, I get goosebumps. So many absurd and unnatural claims have already been declared as rights that a sane person automatically becomes suspicious. Of course, it is important if a person has rights, the only question is what kind of right it is and what is meant by it.

For example, many argue that people should have the right to choose. But what? Because it doesn't matter. It is also not incidental whether I can judge the object of my choice.

According to democracy, we are supposed to be the same, and everyone has the same rights. Although we know this is not the case. For example, we have the right to drive a car "only" after we reach the age of 18. This is because we assume that by this time the person is mature enough to be able to responsibly understand and fulfill the associated expectations. A child is not yet able to assess and become aware of the danger - this requires a certain degree of maturity and experience. Society rightly expects this (because society also has rights!), as this restriction protects not only the young driver, but also society. That's why there are laws and regulations.

80 percent of the Ten Commandments regulate social coexistence, and we can see how important it is that social law overrides individual law - this is the case in every normal society.

Individual law cannot be more important than social law. In addition to the written rules, there are also unwritten rules, which also speak of the importance of social law - and they must be learned, respected, and obeyed. The neoliberal approach, on the other hand, considers individual rights to be more important. This is quite transparently a populist concept, it sounds "good", it evokes "freedom", although it is not freedom at all, but freedom, anarchy, which is also harmful and dangerous from the point of view of society.

Such a "right" is, for example, that the child can change gender freely (!). If a boy feels like a girl (and vice versa) because they planted a flea in his ear that it's normal, then feel free (!) to undergo surgery. Even in spite of the parents. Because he has the right to do so - even if he does not yet understand what it means, what it entails, and what the consequences are. (By the way, I don't understand doctors who do this either, since - according to the Hippocratic oath - this is not their job.)

They even claim the right for men to have children. It's like I have the right to qualify two two as five.

The other day, the European Court of Human Rights surprised the world by declaring that the person giving birth to the child is a woman. With this, she actually stated that the man cannot give birth.

Did it violate the rights of men? It was as if he had just determined that the water was wet.

Still, this verdict is surprising. The first thing that comes to mind is, why does an international court have to say this? The court's decision is always a little subjective - if we have a different opinion about it (the case will be brought before a different court), can we also understand that the "person" performing the birth could be a man or even a computer in order to refute the said decision? Or do we imagine that the laws of nature can be changed by a court decision?

However, the water is wet even if we don't like it, and it's no use throwing the stone up to keep it afloat, because it still falls: gravity works independently of us. This is the order of nature, and the laws of nature cannot be violated or altered.

The question also arises, does this legal body have nothing else to do but to say what everyone already knows - even if anyone has thought that it should not be so? Such a judgment could actually be laughed at if it were not so abnormal - and tragic.

So the doubt remains, am I (and with me the vast majority of humanity), who takes it for granted that the "person" who gives birth to a child is a woman, am I the supposedly outdated fool who loves the past and tradition, or has the world gone mad? because natural things must be clarified by a court ruling.

Author: Péter Aich/Felvidék.ma

(Header image: Facebook )