Are our inalienable rights conditional?

[G.T.]

in·al·ien·a·ble
/inˈālēənəb(ə)l/
Learn to pronounce
adjective

1. unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor.

con·di·tion·al
/kənˈdiSH(ə)n(ə)l/
Learn to pronounce
adjective

1. 1.
   subject to one or more conditions or requirements being met; made or granted on certain terms.

But can be removed by the grantor.

Thus removing the adjective "inalienable."

It's not a hard concept, you're being obtuse.

Inalienable means incapable of being alienated. You're describing a way to alienate those rights. Duh

Not being obtuse at all.

I believe our rights come from God. And that no man may take those rights.

But God can.

So god can alienate them.

 

[ding]

in·al·ien·a·ble
/inˈālēənəb(ə)l/
Learn to pronounce
adjective

1. unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor.

con·di·tion·al
/kənˈdiSH(ə)n(ə)l/
Learn to pronounce
adjective

1. 1.
   subject to one or more conditions or requirements being met; made or granted on certain terms.

But can be removed by the grantor.

Thus removing the adjective "inalienable."

It's not a hard concept, you're being obtuse.

Inalienable means incapable of being alienated. You're describing a way to alienate those rights. Duh

Not being obtuse at all.

I believe our rights come from God. And that no man may take those rights.

But God can.

So god can alienate them.

Now you are getting it. Yes.

But I believe it is more sublime than that. He doesn’t alienate us. We alienate him, but he is more than willing to give us enough rope to hang ourselves. In the end everything works for good.

 

[G.T.]

in·al·ien·a·ble
/inˈālēənəb(ə)l/
Learn to pronounce
adjective

1. unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor.

con·di·tion·al
/kənˈdiSH(ə)n(ə)l/
Learn to pronounce
adjective

1. 1.
   subject to one or more conditions or requirements being met; made or granted on certain terms.

But can be removed by the grantor.

Thus removing the adjective "inalienable."

It's not a hard concept, you're being obtuse.

Inalienable means incapable of being alienated. You're describing a way to alienate those rights. Duh

Not being obtuse at all.

I believe our rights come from God. And that no man may take those rights.

But God can.

So god can alienate them.

Now you are getting it. Yes.

But I believe it is more sublime than that. He doesn’t alienate us. We alienate him, but he is more than willing to give us enough rope to hang ourselves. In the end everything works for good.

Nice try, ding.

I asked if someone can alienate inalienable rights.

You responded yes.

Im thinking its you that needs a reading lesson or three. Consult Mister Beale.

 

[anynameyouwish]

The founding fathers believed that we are given inalienable rights for no other reason than we are God’s creatures, but is that conditional?

Solzhenitsyn believed that these rights are conditional.

“...That is, freedom was given to the individual conditionally, in the assumption of his constant religious responsibility. Such was the heritage of the preceding thousand years...”

He goes on to say that what has occurred since the founding would have been unthinkable by our founders.

“...Two hundred or even fifty years ago, it would have seemed quite impossible, in America, that an individual could be granted boundless freedom simply for the satisfaction of his instincts or whims. Subsequently, however, all such limitations were discarded everywhere in the West; a total liberation occurred from the moral heritage of Christian centuries with their great reserves of mercy and sacrifice. State systems were -- State systems were becoming increasingly and totally materialistic. The West ended up by truly enforcing human rights, sometimes even excessively, but man's sense of responsibility to God and society grew dimmer and dimmer. In the past decades, the legalistically selfish aspect of Western approach and thinking has reached its final dimension and the world wound up in a harsh spiritual crisis and a political impasse. All the glorified technological achievements of Progress, including the conquest of outer space, do not redeem the 20th century's moral poverty which no one could imagine even as late as in the 19th Century...”

yes.


there are christians who believe that the USA is a CHRISTIAN NATION and ONLY christians.

politicalchic believes that.

that is CONDITIONAL.

 

[ding]

But can be removed by the grantor.

Thus removing the adjective "inalienable."

It's not a hard concept, you're being obtuse.

Inalienable means incapable of being alienated. You're describing a way to alienate those rights. Duh

Not being obtuse at all.

I believe our rights come from God. And that no man may take those rights.

But God can.

So god can alienate them.

Now you are getting it. Yes.

But I believe it is more sublime than that. He doesn’t alienate us. We alienate him, but he is more than willing to give us enough rope to hang ourselves. In the end everything works for good.

Nice try, ding.

I asked if someone can alienate inalienable rights.

You responded yes.

Im thinking its you that needs a reading lesson or three. Consult Mister Beale.

You are a genius in your mind, GT.

The premise of this thread is that the rights our founding fathers enumerated in the Declaration of Independence are not unconditional.

So your gotcha moment is pretty lame.

The reality is that inalienable in the context of what we are discussing is limited to men. Another man cannot take away your inalienable rights. He can violate them though. But violating rights is not a removal of rights. Rights can only be lost one of two ways. You can give them away or the entity which gave you those rights in the first place can take them away.

Your argument and intellect in this discussion have been weighed and measured and found to be lacking.

You have the reasoning ability of a person with an IQ of 100.

 

[G.T.]

Thus removing the adjective "inalienable."

It's not a hard concept, you're being obtuse.

Inalienable means incapable of being alienated. You're describing a way to alienate those rights. Duh

Not being obtuse at all.

I believe our rights come from God. And that no man may take those rights.

But God can.

So god can alienate them.

Now you are getting it. Yes.

But I believe it is more sublime than that. He doesn’t alienate us. We alienate him, but he is more than willing to give us enough rope to hang ourselves. In the end everything works for good.

Nice try, ding.

I asked if someone can alienate inalienable rights.

You responded yes.

Im thinking its you that needs a reading lesson or three. Consult Mister Beale.

You are a genius in your mind, GT.

The premise of this thread is that the rights our founding fathers enumerated in the Declaration of Independence are not unconditional.

So your gotcha moment is pretty lame.

The reality is that inalienable in the context of what we are discussing is limited to men. Another man cannot take away your inalienable rights. He can violate them though. But violating rights is not a removal of rights. Rights can only be lost one of two ways. You can give them away or the entity which gave you those rights in the first place can take them away.

Your argument and intellect in this discussion have been weighed and measured and found to be lacking.

You have the reasoning ability of a person with an IQ of 100.

Ill file your opinion right where it belongs there...inalienable rights are alienable.

 

[ding]

Not being obtuse at all.

I believe our rights come from God. And that no man may take those rights.

But God can.

So god can alienate them.

Now you are getting it. Yes.

But I believe it is more sublime than that. He doesn’t alienate us. We alienate him, but he is more than willing to give us enough rope to hang ourselves. In the end everything works for good.

Nice try, ding.

I asked if someone can alienate inalienable rights.

You responded yes.

Im thinking its you that needs a reading lesson or three. Consult Mister Beale.

You are a genius in your mind, GT.

The premise of this thread is that the rights our founding fathers enumerated in the Declaration of Independence are not unconditional.

So your gotcha moment is pretty lame.

The reality is that inalienable in the context of what we are discussing is limited to men. Another man cannot take away your inalienable rights. He can violate them though. But violating rights is not a removal of rights. Rights can only be lost one of two ways. You can give them away or the entity which gave you those rights in the first place can take them away.

Your argument and intellect in this discussion have been weighed and measured and found to be lacking.

You have the reasoning ability of a person with an IQ of 100.

Ill file your opinion right where it belongs there...inalienable rights are alienable.

That’s because it’s your only play.

You can lose your inalienable rights. You can give them away or God can take them away.

 

[G.T.]

So god can alienate them.

Now you are getting it. Yes.

But I believe it is more sublime than that. He doesn’t alienate us. We alienate him, but he is more than willing to give us enough rope to hang ourselves. In the end everything works for good.

Nice try, ding.

I asked if someone can alienate inalienable rights.

You responded yes.

Im thinking its you that needs a reading lesson or three. Consult Mister Beale.

You are a genius in your mind, GT.

The premise of this thread is that the rights our founding fathers enumerated in the Declaration of Independence are not unconditional.

So your gotcha moment is pretty lame.

The reality is that inalienable in the context of what we are discussing is limited to men. Another man cannot take away your inalienable rights. He can violate them though. But violating rights is not a removal of rights. Rights can only be lost one of two ways. You can give them away or the entity which gave you those rights in the first place can take them away.

Your argument and intellect in this discussion have been weighed and measured and found to be lacking.

You have the reasoning ability of a person with an IQ of 100.

Ill file your opinion right where it belongs there...inalienable rights are alienable.

That’s because it’s your only play.

You can lose your inalienable rights. You can give them away or God can take them away.

 

[ding]

Now you are getting it. Yes.

But I believe it is more sublime than that. He doesn’t alienate us. We alienate him, but he is more than willing to give us enough rope to hang ourselves. In the end everything works for good.

Nice try, ding.

I asked if someone can alienate inalienable rights.

You responded yes.

Im thinking its you that needs a reading lesson or three. Consult Mister Beale.

You are a genius in your mind, GT.

The premise of this thread is that the rights our founding fathers enumerated in the Declaration of Independence are not unconditional.

So your gotcha moment is pretty lame.

The reality is that inalienable in the context of what we are discussing is limited to men. Another man cannot take away your inalienable rights. He can violate them though. But violating rights is not a removal of rights. Rights can only be lost one of two ways. You can give them away or the entity which gave you those rights in the first place can take them away.

Your argument and intellect in this discussion have been weighed and measured and found to be lacking.

You have the reasoning ability of a person with an IQ of 100.

Ill file your opinion right where it belongs there...inalienable rights are alienable.

That’s because it’s your only play.

You can lose your inalienable rights. You can give them away or God can take them away.

Too funny.

 

[ding]

Now you are getting it. Yes.

But I believe it is more sublime than that. He doesn’t alienate us. We alienate him, but he is more than willing to give us enough rope to hang ourselves. In the end everything works for good.

Nice try, ding.

I asked if someone can alienate inalienable rights.

You responded yes.

Im thinking its you that needs a reading lesson or three. Consult Mister Beale.

You are a genius in your mind, GT.

The premise of this thread is that the rights our founding fathers enumerated in the Declaration of Independence are not unconditional.

So your gotcha moment is pretty lame.

The reality is that inalienable in the context of what we are discussing is limited to men. Another man cannot take away your inalienable rights. He can violate them though. But violating rights is not a removal of rights. Rights can only be lost one of two ways. You can give them away or the entity which gave you those rights in the first place can take them away.

Your argument and intellect in this discussion have been weighed and measured and found to be lacking.

You have the reasoning ability of a person with an IQ of 100.

Ill file your opinion right where it belongs there...inalienable rights are alienable.

That’s because it’s your only play.

You can lose your inalienable rights. You can give them away or God can take them away.

It seems Locke believed inalienable rights could be lost. The interesting thing is that his argument is based upon logic and not a definition.

“...For having quitted Reason, which God hath given to be the Rule betwixt Man and Man, and the common bond whereby humane kind is united into one fellowship and societie; and having renounced the way of peace, which that teaches, and made use of the Force of War to compasse his unjust ends upon an other, where he has no right, and so revolting from his own kind to that of Beasts by making Force which is theirs, to be his rule of right, he renders himself liable to be destroyed by the injur’d person and the rest of mankind, that will joyn with him in the execution of Justice, as any other wild beast, or noxious brute with whom Mankind can have neither Society nor Security...”

J. Locke, Two Treatises of Government, ed. P Laslett (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), p. 383.

 

[ding]

That didn’t take long.

 

[Taz]

Nobody has inalienable rights.

 

[ding]

Nobody has inalienable rights.

You don’t.

I do.

 

[there4eyeM]

Don't confuse the map with the territory;

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Nobody has inalienable rights.

You don’t.

I do.

Really? So criminals can not rob you? They can not murder you? A storm can not destroy your property? The Government can not take your money or put you in jail for what ever whim they want?

 

[ding]

Nobody has inalienable rights.

You don’t.

I do.

Really? So criminals can not rob you? They can not murder you? A storm can not destroy your property? The Government can not take your money or put you in jail for what ever whim they want?

Not sure what your point is.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Nobody has inalienable rights.

You don’t.

I do.

Really? So criminals can not rob you? They can not murder you? A storm can not destroy your property? The Government can not take your money or put you in jail for what ever whim they want?

Not sure what your point is.

My point is you have NO RIGHTS EXCEPT what you can enforce or someone else enforces.

 

[ding]

Nobody has inalienable rights.

You don’t.

I do.

Really? So criminals can not rob you? They can not murder you? A storm can not destroy your property? The Government can not take your money or put you in jail for what ever whim they want?

Not sure what your point is.

My point is you have NO RIGHTS EXCEPT what you can enforce or someone else enforces.

That is true. But that doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Only that they are conditional.

 

[ding]

Don't confuse the map with the territory;

Don’t confuse the narrative going on in your head with the vague and cryptic meaning of your post.

 

[luchitociencia]

Nice try, ding.

I asked if someone can alienate inalienable rights.

You responded yes.

Im thinking its you that needs a reading lesson or three. Consult Mister Beale.

Have you asked the question yourself if "inalienable rights" at the end is just an expression?

Look at yourself at any age in humanity, in the middle of a formed society, are you really "free"?