I did not confuse anything, you left the type of right undefined. I assumed that the undefined right could be either moral or legal, whereas you interpret "right" to mean "legal right" unless explicitly stated otherwise. This has been an unfortunate misunderstanding.
No, the post I responded to was about the abolition of rights, which restricts it to the class of rights (legal, not moral) for which that phrase is meaningful.
Context matters.
> whereas you interpret "right" to mean "legal right" unless explicitly stated otherwise.
No, I interpret it to mean "legal right" when it is used in a context in which what is being discussed is only meaningful for legal rights.
