Listening to Paul Ryan

[midcan5]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a definition of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

 

[Intense]

The Second Treatise of Civil Government
1690

John Locke
1632-1704

Introduction
CHAP. I.
CHAP. II. Of the State of Nature.
CHAP. III. Of the State of War.
CHAP. IV. Of Slavery.
CHAP. V. Of Property.
CHAP. VI. Of Paternal Power.
CHAP. VII. Of Political or Civil Society.
CHAP. VIII. Of the Beginning of Political Societies.
CHAP. IX. Of the Ends of Political Society and Government.
CHAP. X. Of the Forms of a Common-wealth.
CHAP. XI. Of the Extent of the Legislative Power.
CHAP. XII. Of the Legislative, Executive, and Federative Power of the Common-wealth.
CHAP. XIII. Of the Subordination of the Powers of the Common-wealth.
CHAP. XIV. Of Prerogative.
CHAP. XV. Of Paternal, Political, and Despotical Power, considered together.
CHAP. XVI. Of Conquest.
CHAP. XVII. Of Usurpation.
CHAP. XVIII. Of Tyranny.
CHAP. XIX. Of the Dissolution of Government.



John Locke: Second Treatise of Civil Government

 

[The Rabbi]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a defintion of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

All men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and among these are life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

 

[jillian]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a defintion of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

it's an interesting concept in terms of political philosophy.

in reality, rights only exist which the government is willing to enforce. i'm sure that 2nd generation japanese-americans would have been pleased to attest to that in 1940....

and women, pre-vote, would have seconded...

which would have been fully agreed with by blacks during slavery, and post slavery through the jim crow era.

and that doesn't even begin to touch on things like the right to marry a person of the color you choose (not enforced until loving v virginia during the 70's) and a myriad of other issues

 

[The Rabbi]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a defintion of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

it's an interesting concept in terms of political philosophy.

in reality, rights only exist which the government is willing to enforce. i'm sure that 2nd generation japanese-americans would have been pleased to attest to that in 1940....

and women, pre-vote, would have seconded...

which would have been fully agreed with by blacks during slavery, and post slavery through the jim crow era.

and that doesn't even begin to touch on things like the right to marry a person of the color you choose (not enforced until loving v virginia) and a myriad of other issues

Interned Japanese Americans received compensation. Women were not denied any rights. People were free to move to states that recognized interracial marriage.
Pointing out examples like this really isn't much of an argument.

 

[Valerie]

“Thank you Governor Romney, Ann. I am deeply honored and excited to join you as your running mate.

Mitt Romney is a leader with the skills, the background and the character that our country needs at a crucial time in its history. Following four years of failed leadership, the hopes of our country, which have inspired the world, are growing dim; and they need someone to revive them. Governor Romney is the man for this moment; and he and I share one commitment: we will restore the dreams and greatness of this country.

I want you to meet my family. My wife Janna, our daughter Liza, and our sons, Charlie and Sam.

I am surrounded by the people I love, and I have been asked by Governor Romney to serve the country I love.

Janesville, Wisconsin is where I was born and raised, and I never really left it. It’s our home now.

For the last 14 years, I have proudly represented Wisconsin in Congress. There, I have focused on solving the problems that confront our country, and turning ideas into action; and action into solutions.

I am committed, in heart and mind, to putting that experience to work in a Romney Administration. This is a crucial moment in the life of our nation; and it is absolutely vital that we select the right man to lead America back to prosperity and greatness.

That man is standing next to me. His name is Mitt Romney. And he will be the next president of the United States.

My dad died when I was young. He was a good and decent man. I still remember a couple of things he would say that have really stuck with me. “Son you are either part of the problem or part of the solution.”

Regrettably, President Obama has become part of the problem,...and Mitt Romney is the solution.

The other thing my dad would say is that every generation of Americans leaves their children better off. That’s the American legacy.

Sadly, for the first time in our history, we are on a path which will undo that legacy. That is why we need new leadership to become part of the solution – new leadership to restore prosperity, economic growth, and jobs.

It is our duty to save the American Dream for our children, and theirs.

And I believe there is no person in America who is better prepared – because of his experience; because of the principles he holds; and because of his achievements and excellence in so many different arenas – to lead America at this point in its history.

Let me say a word about the man Mitt Romney will replace. No one disputes President Obama inherited a difficult situation. And, in his first 2 years, with his party in complete control of Washington, he passed nearly every item on his agenda. But that didn’t make things better.

In fact, we find ourselves in a nation facing debt, doubt and despair.

This is the worst economic recovery in 70 years. Unemployment has been above 8 percent for more than three years, the longest run since the Great Depression. Families are hurting.

We have the largest deficits and the biggest federal government since WWII.

Nearly 1 out of 6 Americans are in poverty--the worst rate in a generation. Moms and dads are struggling to make ends meet.

Household incomes have dropped by more than $4,000 over the past four years.

Whatever the explanations, whatever the excuses, this is a record of failure.


President Obama, and too many like him in Washington, have refused to make difficult decisions because they are more worried about their next election than they are about the next generation. We might have been able to get away with that before, but not now. We’re in a different, and dangerous, moment. We’re running out of time -- and we can’t afford 4 more years of this.

Politicians from both parties have made empty promises which will soon become broken promises--with painful consequences--if we fail to act now.

I represent a part of America that includes inner cities, rural areas, suburbs and factory towns. Over the years I have seen and heard from a lot from families, from those running small businesses, and from people who are in need. But what I have heard lately troubles me the most. There is something different in their voice and in their words. What I hear from them are diminished dreams, lowered expectations, uncertain futures.

I hear some people say that this is just “the new normal.” High unemployment, declining incomes and crushing debt is not a new normal. It’s the result of misguided policies. And next January, our economy will begin a comeback with the Romney Plan for a Stronger Middle Class that will lead to more jobs and more take home pay for working Americans.

America is on the wrong track; but Mitt Romney and I will take the right steps, in the right time, to get us back on the right track!

I believe my record of getting things done in Congress will be a very helpful complement to Governor Romney’s executive and private sector success outside Washington. I have worked closely with Republicans as well as Democrats to advance an agenda of economic growth, fiscal discipline, and job creation.

I’m proud to stand with a man who understands what it takes to foster job creation in our economy, someone who knows from experience, that if you have a small business—you did build that.

At Bain Capital, he launched new businesses and he turned around failing ones – companies like Staples, Bright Horizons and Sports Authority, just to name a few. Mitt Romney created jobs and showed he knows how a free economy works.

At the Olympics, he took a failing enterprise and made it the pride of our entire nation.

As governor of Massachusetts, he worked with Democrats and Republicans to balance budgets with no tax increases, lower unemployment, increase income and improve people’s lives.

In all of these things, Mitt Romney has shown himself to be a man of achievement, excellence and integrity.

Janna and I tell Liza, Charlie and Sam that America is a place where, if you work hard and play by the rules, you can get ahead.

We Americans look at one another’s success with pride, not resentment, because we know, as more Americans work hard, take risks, and succeed, more people will prosper, our communities will benefit, and individual lives will be improved and uplifted.

But America is more than just a place...it’s an idea. It’s the only country founded on an idea. Our rights come from nature and God, not government. We promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.

This idea is founded on the principles of liberty, freedom, free enterprise, self-determination and government by consent of the governed.

This idea is under assault. So, we have a critical decision to make as a nation.

We are on an unsustainable path that is robbing America of our freedom and security. It doesn’t have to be this way.

The commitment Mitt Romney and I make to you is this:

We won’t duck the tough issues...we will lead!

We won’t blame others...we will take responsibility!

We won’t replace our founding principles...we will reapply them!

We will honor you, our fellow citizens, by giving you the right and opportunity to make the choice:

What kind of country do we want to have?

What kind of people do we want to be?

We can turn this thing around. Real solutions can be delivered. But, it will take leadership. And the courage to tell you the truth.

Mitt Romney is this kind of leader. I’m excited for what lies ahead and I’m thrilled to be a part of America’s Comeback Team. And together, we will unite America and get this done.

Thank you.”

Text of Paul Ryan


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMQw6fsF_ts]Paul Ryan's speech at Norfolk, Virginia - YouTube[/ame]

 

[jillian]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a defintion of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

All men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and among these are life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

again, nice concept... but the declaration of independence doesn't carry force of law...

which brings us back to...the rights only exist which government will enforce.

 

[jillian]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a defintion of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

it's an interesting concept in terms of political philosophy.

in reality, rights only exist which the government is willing to enforce. i'm sure that 2nd generation japanese-americans would have been pleased to attest to that in 1940....

and women, pre-vote, would have seconded...

which would have been fully agreed with by blacks during slavery, and post slavery through the jim crow era.

and that doesn't even begin to touch on things like the right to marry a person of the color you choose (not enforced until loving v virginia) and a myriad of other issues

Interned Japanese Americans received compensation. Women were not denied any rights. People were free to move to states that recognized interracial marriage.
Pointing out examples like this really isn't much of an argument.

they received compensation...but what do you think their freedom was worth?

if all jews were suddenly interned, and twenty years from now, our kids got money, would that make up for stealing our freedom?

freedom to move to other states is not what we're talking about. we're talking about existence of rights.

and why when the constitution guarantees equality of treatment, should anyone HAVE to move? people don't just get up and leave family, homes, careers, jobs... and why should they?

i think that proves my point about rights only existing which government enforces.

 

[jillian]

The Second Treatise of Civil Government
1690

John Locke
1632-1704

Introduction
CHAP. I.
CHAP. II. Of the State of Nature.
CHAP. III. Of the State of War.
CHAP. IV. Of Slavery.
CHAP. V. Of Property.
CHAP. VI. Of Paternal Power.
CHAP. VII. Of Political or Civil Society.
CHAP. VIII. Of the Beginning of Political Societies.
CHAP. IX. Of the Ends of Political Society and Government.
CHAP. X. Of the Forms of a Common-wealth.
CHAP. XI. Of the Extent of the Legislative Power.
CHAP. XII. Of the Legislative, Executive, and Federative Power of the Common-wealth.
CHAP. XIII. Of the Subordination of the Powers of the Common-wealth.
CHAP. XIV. Of Prerogative.
CHAP. XV. Of Paternal, Political, and Despotical Power, considered together.
CHAP. XVI. Of Conquest.
CHAP. XVII. Of Usurpation.
CHAP. XVIII. Of Tyranny.
CHAP. XIX. Of the Dissolution of Government.



John Locke: Second Treatise of Civil Government

again, i love political philosophy. but i suspect hobbs would have had different ideas about the social contract.

 

[Valerie]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a defintion of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

The opening of the United States Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson in 1776, states as follows:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;[7]

In 1776 the Second Continental Congress asked Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Robert Livingston, and Roger Sherman to write the Declaration of Independence. The five men voted to have Thomas Jefferson write the document. After Jefferson finished he gave the document to Franklin to proof. Franklin suggested minor changes, but one of them stands out far more than the others. Jefferson had written, "We hold these truths to be sacred and un-deniable..." Franklin changed it to, "We hold these truths to be self-evident."


All men are created equal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Valerie]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a defintion of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

The opening of the United States Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson in 1776, states as follows:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;[7]

In 1776 the Second Continental Congress asked Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Robert Livingston, and Roger Sherman to write the Declaration of Independence. The five men voted to have Thomas Jefferson write the document. After Jefferson finished he gave the document to Franklin to proof. Franklin suggested minor changes, but one of them stands out far more than the others. Jefferson had written, "We hold these truths to be sacred and un-deniable..." Franklin changed it to, "We hold these truths to be self-evident."


All men are created equal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And that liberty would include not accepting any particular religious belief or necessarily any belief in God, but we are endowed by our creator, whatever one freely conceives that source of creation to be...

 

[Katzndogz]

IF we really have come to a point where people honestly believe that our rights are given or withheld by government, we don't have a country left anymore. We have moved government back to beyond even the Magna Carta, to the point where rights were at the whim of the King.

The government doesn't enforce rights. The government is and always was, to protect the natural, God given rights of the people.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Progs keep referring obliquely to Mao's gun barrel because they reject God and nature

 

[Valerie]

But America is more than just a place...it’s an idea. It’s the only country founded on an idea. Our rights come from nature and God, not government. We promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.

This idea is founded on the principles of liberty, freedom, free enterprise, self-determination and government by consent of the governed.






Ryan and Romney are men who include God in their words and deeds, but our founders wisely used the word CREATOR with very good reason...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a defintion of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

What the Framers referred to as ‘privileges or immunities,’ the rights which predate both the government and Constitution, and can be taken by neither man nor government, as they are a manifestation of one’s humanity.

One’s rights are not absolute, however, as government is authorized by the Constitution to enact limitations, provided such limitations comport with Constitutional case law.

One has the right to free speech and assembly, for example, but not the right to have a ‘sleep-in’ in a city park, setting up tents and the like, jurisdictions are authorized to limit or prohibit such activities. See: Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence (1984).

One has the right to practice whatever religion he wishes, or no religion at all, but that right does not extend to religious activities that violate a legitimate law. See: Employment Div. v. Smith (1988).

…the rights only exist which government will enforce.

Perhaps this could be rephrased to something like: ‘rights exist to the extent of legitimate government limitation.’

In theory a citizen has the right to do whatever he wants, until such time as the government says he can’t. The citizen then has a choice to make: accept the limitation or challenge the constitutionality of the limitation (law) in court.

 

[FJO]

But America is more than just a place...it’s an idea. It’s the only country founded on an idea. Our rights come from nature and God, not government. We promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.

This idea is founded on the principles of liberty, freedom, free enterprise, self-determination and government by consent of the governed.






Ryan and Romney are men who include God in their words and deeds, but our founders wisely used the word CREATOR with very good reason...

Still better than the Democrats who are banning God/Creator from public places and more importantly and sadly from the minds of children.

 

[peach174]

For the last one hundred years our Federal Government has continually growen and has turned it's self into a Government for the Government by the Government.
Both parties have made laws that favor only the two party system and has turned the government to rule over the people instead of the people ruling over the government.

What Ryan is talking about is what we are suppose to be.
A REPUBLIC of small to medium government.
Fed laws that protect Americans and helps our businesses - not hinder them.
A government of the people, by the people and for the people.
A government that can not make laws that violates our God given rights, which is life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Our rights are being taken away (liberty), our life and livelihood is being taken away because of the laws and the majority of us are not happy.
We now have a Federal Government that is violating and totally ignoring the Constitution.
It is not right that the people of this nation has to go to court continually to fight for our constitutional rights.
This is what Paul Ryan is talking about.

 

[uscitizen]

The RNC clearly wrote Ryans acceptance speech.
It says a whole lot of nothing.

 

[midcan5]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a definition of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

All men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and among these are life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Those words are from the Constitution, it is neither nature nor gawd, it was written by men and its power, if it has any at all, resides in how people in America interpret those words. The pursuit of happiness is particularly hard to establish as a right, what would they entail? So then you disagree with Ryan as those rights do come from our constitutional government?

Intense, Locke is not gawd and certainly not nature, borrow but give us detail.

Valerie, The full text of Ryan's comments is not the question, but you did give away part of my purpose in asking this question. The full text contains more BS than honest history, we can go there another time.


Be back, good lord willing and the creek don't rise.

 

[Intense]

Paul Ryan said yesterday, that our rights come from Gawd and nature. So then my question is, if rights come from Gawd and nature, what might they be? Can someone describe a right that comes from nature? Can someone define a right that comes from Gawd? I am interested in a defintion of these rights, their foundational source (no tautologies), explanatory reasons, and consequential implications.

it's an interesting concept in terms of political philosophy.

in reality, rights only exist which the government is willing to enforce. i'm sure that 2nd generation japanese-americans would have been pleased to attest to that in 1940....

and women, pre-vote, would have seconded...

which would have been fully agreed with by blacks during slavery, and post slavery through the jim crow era.

and that doesn't even begin to touch on things like the right to marry a person of the color you choose (not enforced until loving v virginia during the 70's) and a myriad of other issues

We all have Rights that We Each Enforce, with or without Governments knowledge, approval, permission, or consent. There are Authorities higher than that of Government.