What does it Mean to be Entitled? Philosophical Considerations and Ethical Scope of Law

It seems justified to affirm, on the basis of the spirit of the first article of the universal declaration of human rights of 1789, that man is, by nature, a being of law, that is- that is to say that he naturally enjoys different rights apart from all racial, political, ethnic, religious considerations, and among others. These include, for example, the rights to life, health, security, expression, leisure, property, freedom of choice, debt, etc. They are called subjective rights. Therefore, the notion of "having rights" appears to be clear, clear and understandable without any ambiguity. It is obvious that man, thanks to his nature, has rights, which are inalienable, and capable of being easily mobilized by him. However, in society, the mobilization of all rights by individuals, regardless of their legitimacy, is not automatic or de facto guaranteed. In practice, it happens that the individual is not able to easily mobilize and enjoy all the different rights. For example, of course, the right to smoke is recognized for all adults, but smoking is not permitted in all public spaces, except those designed for this purpose. In fact, smoking in all public spaces is not a de facto recognized right. The individual therefore does not have the possibility of enjoying it without limit. Hence the following legitimate question: what does "being entitled" mean? In other words, what does it mean that man, by living in society, has rights? What then can be the philosophical considerations of the notion "to have a right"? Can the law have an ethical impact on society? If yes, what is its meaning? To answer these different questions, let it be permitted to affirm that "having any rights" presupposes that individuals are able to mobilize, fully enjoy and be able to claim or even claim these rights without hindrance. However, they can, in reality, only enjoy, claim or claim rights that are effectively recognized by society. It amounts to considering, in fact, that they can only mobilize and really enjoy those defined by society, that is to say objective rights. These then, it seems to us, are the different philosophical considerations of the notion of "having the right". Here, the task will be to further develop the thesis thus presented from a perspective of the contextual approach.