removed the definitions of the rights he had been given in terms of what threatened them lost their bearings and at the same time their content (Mead, 1915). Once man committed wrong, he equivalently enters to the state of war which I insist to be a situation where man already dethrones natural rights he have. Locke is right when he mentioned that he that in the state of nature would take away the freedom that belongs to any one in that state must necessarily supposed to have a design to take away everything else, that freedom being the foundation of all the rest (Prometheus Books , 1986). No man has the right to use natural right for the sake of performing wrong for the betterment of the society. Speech of man supposed to be the powerful …show more content…
A natural right should be abiding the natural law; against the natural law is dethroned of rights. Regarding man whose expressing wrong to the society may destructible to the deeds of good society. The Destruction of rights beyond its people who follows the enormous news labelled as the decreased of its capacity to preserve natural rights of himself. Locke mentioned that every one has a right to punish the transgressors of that law to such a degree as may hinder its violation (Prometheus Books , 1986) but in this sense, government honors this act as a form of gaining followers from a nationalistic religion of its own. The right to express does not, in any favorable circumstances means wrong, in fact it is a right which man have naturally. The problem of expressing is the expression of wrong using and invoking that natural rights they have, give them consent to do so. Action may perform in the acts of speech; therefore, the act of speech includes rights to perform wrong. Only awareness of the latter would be moral knowledge. But just because there is no such awareness, we must obtain knowledge of the law of nature “by the use and due application of our natural faculties” (Mack, 1980). Few of men