@kentwillard a problem is that the word "right" doesn't encourage balance. the core definition of a right is that it's something enforceable even over the objection of others. it's a trump card.

obviously when multiple "rights" conflict, they can't all trump one another. there has to be either a choice, or some balance struck that limits the exercise of some rights to help exonerate others.

but often, if something is a "right", people take its limitation or abrogation as a *prima facie* wrong.