positive rights

So on this side we actually believe in positive rights.

You keep stating things in terms of positive rights, which doesn't fit.

This is a rather negative approach, since it tells us nothing about any positive rights that citizens may have.

Some have cited differences between 'positive rights' and personal freedoms.

These are both negative and positive rights as well as democratic rights.

Secondly, the positive rights: these guarantee the participation of the individual in political and social decision-making processes.

Positive rights are permissions to do things, or entitlements to be done unto.

But entitlements are positive rights, and they are limited by finite resources.

Second, it would ensure that workers enjoyed positive rights under law and reduce the emphasis of union immunities.

The British approach of refusing to assert positive rights gives freedom no weapons with which to retaliate.

The conservative is appalled by a change in emphasis in American politics, from negative to positive rights.

Where written constitutions speak of positive rights the British tradition is to speak in negative terms.

The question therefore is not whether section 7 has ever been -or will ever be- recognized as creating positive rights.

Central to the communitarian philosophy is the concept of positive rights, which are rights or guarantees to certain things.

And the Charter guarantees positive rights and freedoms which concern all individuals in their daily existence.

The constitutions of most liberal democracies guarantee negative rights, but not all include positive rights.

Government must thereby ensure the provision of positive rights, protect civil liberties and ensure equality.

In the field of Medicine, positive rights of patients often conflict with negative rights of physicians.

See negative and positive rights.

And, just as with academic freedom for academic staff, we can distinguish negative and positive rights for students.

Both inside and outside the European Union, children's positive rights are often violated, and there is still discriminatory treatment due to sexual inequality.

In the same vein, supporters of positive rights further argue that negative rights are irrelevant in their absence.

The restrictive nature of union nationality led to the establishment of a categorical citizenship that lacked any positive rights.

"Never before has there been enshrined in any piece of legislation a set of positive rights," Ms. Luping said.

Shue goes further, and maintains that the negative and positive rights distinction can be harmful, because it may result in the neglect of necessary duties.