"Ethics"—what does it mean? Rights and freedoms—positive and negative rights—can they ever conflict?

What do we mean precisely when we term "ethics"? Can rights—which are positive rights—and freedoms—which are negative rights—ever find themselves in a situation where they are in direct conflict with one another?

Hello! This answers are based on WW2 " Can all you can" poster. 1. This poster was trying to encourage American and British citizens to can their grown produce from their "victory gardens." The purpose of this argument was too limit citizens dependence on food rations. 2. The context of this poster is that, during WW2 there were often food shortages which caused the government to start rationing the food that was available. The audience for this specific poster would be any U.S or British Citizen who was healthy enough to garden. 3. I feel like the first appeal that I found most obvious was ethos, in the fact that this poster was distributed by the U.S. Government, which holds a lot of authority. I noticed Pathos at the bottom of the poster where it says " IT'S A REAL WAR JOB!" this suggests that by canning their produce they would be helping advance the war effort. . An example of logos for this poster would be If you can all your produce, you are helping the war end sooner.…

Just what does the term "ethics" entail? Could there ever be a situation where positive claim rights and negative freedoms directly conflict with one another?