I believe I mentioned the two common divisions of rights. Those created by man made law and those derived from natural law. I don?t deal in morality, at least in the conventional sense. Legal rights are easy, and I don?t believe it is really necessary for me to address them. Rights derived from natural law are not easy. What you seem to want is a definition in the linear mode for a subject that I feel is really very difficult to define in the linear mode. Since natural law derives from the nature of reality itself, we have an ontological question. There are two modes of thought which deal with this, one the linear and two, the intuitive. That is, if we are using Robert Ornstein?s terminology. In Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism, there is really no terminology directly compatible with Western terminology. However, there the issue is addressed as well.
In Taoism, we have the Tao and then our Tao. The way of all being, and the way within that way which is unique for each individual.
However, the words that I have just used are linear, and inadequate to the task for they indicate separation. Truth is continuous and infinite, and so it cannot be divided and isolated. However, once again, words have reached their limits, or I should say, my words have reached their limits.
Fundamentally that is the limitation of written language, because written language, by its very nature, is linear.