It was his house. And it was an important family weekend. A lot of people were going to be coming and going from the house, and he didn't want anyone walking in on this guy banging his daughter.
shareHis house, his rules... 😉
Also, as patriarch of the family, he had the right to exercise his privilege over his daughter's body... no?
...
...
...
Just kidding 😁 .... That's part of the humour of the movie, rather than dealing with the father's patriarchal point of view and such in a mature, respectful but assertive way, Stiller's character acts childishly and regresses to an adolescent way of behaving... i.e. He became exactly the kind of teenager that would require adult supervision and rules 😎
What IS a 'right', and where does it come from?
Why do you have rights, how and when do you acquire them?
When does someone have authority over another, and why does that happen?
Before you can truthfully and correctly answer these questions, you won't understand whether someone has a right to do something in a given situation, and whether someone has an obligation to obey someone's demans or not in a given situation.
According to some people, like Mr. Badnarik, rights come from ownership. So you have all your rights when you are incarnated, because you own your body, and thus no one can do anything to or with your body without your consent (although people stomp on these rights a lot).
The 'unalienable' part means that you cannot be separated from your rights, you have them always with you.
Rights do not come from a piece of paper or whatever any legal system has to say - they come from you owning your body, and from this, all your rights stem. You have right to free speech, because you own your mouth, vocal cords, lungs, etc. So you can freely dictate what kind of utterances the body you own makes.
Now, I am not saying this viewpoint is necessarily 100% correct, but it's a good rule of thumb when you think about who has a 'right' to or for something. When you think of 'ownership', 'it's your body', and 'obligation comes from your consent to be governed', you can realize who has what right to whatever, and who doesn't, in almost any given situation.
Now, Greg doesn't have obligation to stay in that house whatsoever. He is free to leave. The owner of the house and land has the perfect right to dictate whatever rules to any visitor. If you invite someone in your house, and they want to use your computer, you can dictate -whatever- conditions or rules to using that computer. If they consent, then they're obliged to obey those rules.
Greg has two choices; he can conform to the house rules, or he can leave. The parents have the perfect right.
Furthermore, Jack owns his body, and thus also his mouth. He has the -perfect- right to TELL anyone ANYTHING.
It's a different story, whether anyone is obliged to obey what he tells them, but he does have the perfect right to not only tell them to not have sex, but to also put it as a condition of their stay. Why would you ever think otherwise?
They're free to go to a motel to have sex if they want, but the owner of a house has the right to impose and enforce any rules the owner sees fit. It's also a very reasonable and expected rule, and the way Jack tells Greg about it, seems civilized and humane.
Why does sex always have to be some kind of undisturbed and uncontrolled god, that has to be worshipped at every turn and let wild and loose in every situation? Can't it ever be restricted even slightly without some decadent fool jumping from the bush like a caveman to shriek about rights, of which it knows nothing about?
He had the right to tell them the issue is what he was going to do if they did not comply?
I agree it is stupid to tell 2 people who live together they cannot screw just because it is in your house.
Jack was a prick but this was one of the things to not bash him for. This request was very reasonable and Greg being a decent person was quick to say "yes of course". Any person who's not a jerk would understand Jack's POV on this.
share