Originally Posted by hyperskeptic
I understand the impulse here, but it seems to me the language of rights is out of place in personal relationships, at least if 'rights' = 'things to which I am entitled, which therefore place an obligation on you'.
If you want to formalize something, it might be more helpful to think of it as a "Charter of Mutual (Reasonable) Expectations". As it happens, many of the points set out above might fit more readily under "reasonable expectations" than under "rights".
I'm late catching up to this discussion, but i also like this "title" better. Something about the original post rubbed me the wrong way (i was kind of bored by the "secondary bill of rights" thing too which has a lot of Franklin-Veaux-isms about it, so i thought that was what annoyed me. Well it DOES annoy me sometimes, but it's not the only thing that does), i couldn't put my finger on it because there was nothing absurd about the ideas contained within... Believe me i tried to find something absurd to pick apart and couldn't, lol. Now i realize that it's the word "rights" or "bill of rights", as if the people in a relationship are each other's government and they have to declare all this stuff so the government doesn't violate their "rights". Although i do not feel entitled to anything FROM another person, i do feel entitled to take control of my own attitude, and "rights" have very little to do with that, i just do it and don't worry about my "rights". At least until the government of my country starts keeping records about my personal life...
Now that i think about it, i'm not crazy about "charter" either, because it makes it sound like i'm running my relationship with a board of directors or something. I like the word "list". Short, accurate and boring. I like boring. It keeps things simple. Simple is good. That is all.