The Lemon Test 2.0: True Rights Cannot Trample Others' Rights
Source: https://www.facebook.com/americanspectator/. "The Lemon Test 2.0 | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics." February 15, 2026. spectator.org
The Gist
The author argues that real rights can't exist if exercising them requires stomping on someone else's identical rights. Using examples like Don Lemon disrupting church services and a mayor celebrating hijab freedom while ignoring Iranian women's oppression, he says true rights require humility and universal application.
Conclusion
Any claimed exercise of freedom that requires curtailing another person's right to the same exercise is not a legitimate right
Premises
- Don Lemon's disruption of church worship while claiming First Amendment press freedom demonstrates how rights claims can become assaults on others' rights
- True rights require humility and recognition that 'the right of your fist ends at my nose'
- Mayor Mamdani's celebration of World Hijab Day while ignoring Iranian women's oppression shows selective application of rights principles
- Legitimate rights must be universally applicable - you cannot claim a right you don't simultaneously grant to those who differ from you
- Historical American jurisprudence, including Kennedy v. Bremerton, supports religious freedom without trampling others' equal rights
- The biblical principle of humility alongside power has been foundational to Western rights-based politics
Assumptions
- Rights derive from God rather than the state
- Humility is essential for a functioning democracy and rights system
- There is an objective moral hierarchy where some injustices are greater than others
- Consistency in applying rights principles across different contexts is morally required
- Religious freedom includes both the right to practice and the right to be free from coercion