An interesting philosophical argument, though it's probably been made tens of thousands of times on HN, at least. Including the obvious arguments and counter-arguments, could you boil it down to what's new?
If you claim logical consistency, I don't know how the group having rights an individual does not ever gets reconciled.
In a town of three if two vote to take from the third it's clearly not just.
Yet somehow as the group size grows people lose sight of that.
I'll just say this part, then: IMHO that's always the wrong position to be in. We all desire logical consistency, but we don't ever get it. No theory even approaches 100% depiction of reality.