What does "God-Given Rights" mean?

[SniperFire]

My 'argument' is not whether or not God created us.

I am pointing out the absurdity and logical fail of any claim that our rights are 'unalienable' if they are just an abstract construct of the fertile imagination of mankind.

That argument is stupid on its face.

You're right. That is an absurd and illogical argument. But its only you who is making it. The rest of us are saying that unalienable freedom is the default state of any being with volition. It's not a 'construct', it's the nature of the existence of a conscious mind.

If you believe that God created us, and the world we live in - then it makes sense for you to believe he is the source of that state of freedom. But even if you don't, freedom is still the default state of being. The question of god, or natural vs. supernatural is utterly irrelevant to that observation.

That is ridiculous.

Explain to me how carbon atoms have such a 'default state of being. '

I will wait.

 

[there4eyeM]

"In fact, rights are abstract."

Co - rekto - mon - do -!!!!

Totally!

 

[dblack]

My 'argument' is not whether or not God created us.

I am pointing out the absurdity and logical fail of any claim that our rights are 'unalienable' if they are just an abstract construct of the fertile imagination of mankind.

That argument is stupid on its face.

You're right. That is an absurd and illogical argument. But its only you who is making it. The rest of us are saying that unalienable freedom is the default state of any being with volition. It's not a 'construct', it's the nature of the existence of a conscious mind.

If you believe that God created us, and the world we live in - then it makes sense for you to believe he is the source of that state of freedom. But even if you don't, freedom is still the default state of being. The question of god, or natural vs. supernatural is utterly irrelevant to that observation.

That is ridiculous.

Explain to me how carbon atoms have such a 'default state of being. '

I will wait.

What?? What does that have to do with anything?

Shit... fuck. I'm sorry. I thought you might actually read, or think coherently about the subject. My bad. n/m

 

[Murf76]

My 'argument' is not whether or not God created us.

I am pointing out the absurdity and logical fail of any claim that our rights are 'unalienable' if they are just an abstract construct of the fertile imagination of mankind.

That argument is stupid on its face.

You're right. That is an absurd and illogical argument. But its only you who is making it. The rest of us are saying that unalienable freedom is the default state of any being with volition. It's not a 'construct', it's the nature of the existence of a conscious mind.

If you believe that God created us, and the world we live in - then it makes sense for you to believe he is the source of that state of freedom. But even if you don't, freedom is still the default state of being. The question of god, or natural vs. supernatural is utterly irrelevant to that observation.

That is ridiculous.

Explain to me how carbon atoms have such a 'default state of being. '

I will wait.

A carbon atom is a carbon atom. It can be differentiated from other atoms by specific characteristics.

 

[SniperFire]

I'll answer for you dback, as you are rather slow.

You will say that our rights are the 'default state of being' because... because... (wait for it...) because man says so.

Then I will point out that you are welcome to your opinion, but that certainly was not how the Founders viewed it, as I have exhaustively proven.

But that is not the issue here. What is the issue is that you rather moronically claim that said rights are 'unalienable' which is an absurd argument on its face if, in fact, we go by your own explanation of how our rights were constructed in the first place.

 

[SniperFire]

There can be nothing 'unalienable' about rights if our rights are not above the definition of the next totalitarian regime.

 

[California Girl]

it merely means rights as a human being by virtue of being alive.

No, idiot... not by being alive, but by being born in the United States of America.

 

[dblack]

I'll answer for you dback, as you are rather slow.

You will say that our rights are the 'default state of being' because... because... (wait for it...) because man says so.

Then I will point out that you are welcome to your opinion, but that certainly was not how the Founders viewed it, as I have exhaustively proven.

But that is not the issue here. What is the issue is that you rather moronically claim that said rights are 'unalienable' which is an absurd argument on its face if, in fact, we go by your own explanation of how our rights were constructed in the first place.

Being an idiot and a jerk at once, is not a good combo. You can generally get away with one or the other. Idiots with good intent aren't so bad, and jerks who can do something useful have their place. But damn, it's really a waste to have nothing but asshattery going on.

So, you know, I can't stop you from staggering into these threads, dropping your drawers and pooping all over the place. But damn, have some self-respect once in a while. It might do you good.

 

[Inthemiddle]

it merely means rights as a human being by virtue of being alive.

No, idiot... not by being alive, but by being born in the United States of America.

So only Americans have the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

You're a fucking idiot.

 

[SniperFire]

You're right. That is an absurd and illogical argument. But its only you who is making it. The rest of us are saying that unalienable freedom is the default state of any being with volition. It's not a 'construct', it's the nature of the existence of a conscious mind.

If you believe that God created us, and the world we live in - then it makes sense for you to believe he is the source of that state of freedom. But even if you don't, freedom is still the default state of being. The question of god, or natural vs. supernatural is utterly irrelevant to that observation.

That is ridiculous.

Explain to me how carbon atoms have such a 'default state of being. '

I will wait.

What?? What does that have to do with anything?

Shit... fuck. I'm sorry. I thought you might actually read, or think coherently about the subject. My bad. n/m

How can a collection of molecules possible enjoy rights as 'a default state of being'?

You are some sort of freaky spiritual shaman, aren't you?

 

[SniperFire]

I'll answer for you dback, as you are rather slow.

You will say that our rights are the 'default state of being' because... because... (wait for it...) because man says so.

Then I will point out that you are welcome to your opinion, but that certainly was not how the Founders viewed it, as I have exhaustively proven.

But that is not the issue here. What is the issue is that you rather moronically claim that said rights are 'unalienable' which is an absurd argument on its face if, in fact, we go by your own explanation of how our rights were constructed in the first place.

Being an idiot and a jerk at once, is not a good combo. You can generally get away with one or the other. Idiots with good intent aren't so bad, and jerks who can do something useful have their place. But damn, it's really a waste to have nothing but asshattery going on.

So, you know, I can't stop you from staggering into these threads, dropping your drawers and pooping all over the place. But damn, have some self-respect once in a while. It might do you good.

I am mopping the floor with you, if you haven't notice as of yet.


LOLOLOLOLOL

 

[Murf76]

it merely means rights as a human being by virtue of being alive.

No, idiot... not by being alive, but by being born in the United States of America.

Why wouldn't every human being be possessed of unalienable rights?
The fact that we aren't in a position to secure those rights, as we are in our own country by virtue of our Constitution, wouldn't mean that the rights of other peoples don't exist.

 

[Murf76]

{omg... This thread is proof positive that our public school system has FAILED America}

 

[Inthemiddle]

I'll answer for you dback, as you are rather slow.

You will say that our rights are the 'default state of being' because... because... (wait for it...) because man says so.

Then I will point out that you are welcome to your opinion, but that certainly was not how the Founders viewed it, as I have exhaustively proven.

But that is not the issue here. What is the issue is that you rather moronically claim that said rights are 'unalienable' which is an absurd argument on its face if, in fact, we go by your own explanation of how our rights were constructed in the first place.

Being an idiot and a jerk at once, is not a good combo. You can generally get away with one or the other. Idiots with good intent aren't so bad, and jerks who can do something useful have their place. But damn, it's really a waste to have nothing but asshattery going on.

So, you know, I can't stop you from staggering into these threads, dropping your drawers and pooping all over the place. But damn, have some self-respect once in a while. It might do you good.

I am mopping the floor with you, if you haven't notice as of yet.


LOLOLOLOLOL

You remind me of this chick I used to work with back when I used to work in the restaurant business. After two years working at that place, the girl comes up to me and says that she needs more coffee made. I tell her to go make it herself, and she says she doesn't know how. Later that same day, I busy her for about ten minutes going next door for ice mix. When she comes back asking for the light bulb repair kit I told her to just sit down before she hurt her head. She then has the insanity to look at me and say "Are you calling me dumb? I'm not dumb, I'm smart!"

Bitch was so stupid she didn't even realize how stupid she was.

 

[there4eyeM]

In or unalienable is a human concept.

Rights are a human concept.

Humans have the logical right to ascribe inalienable attributes to whatever rights they decide. Humans can decide that they want these selected rights to be accepted by other humans, even all other humans. To do that, they have to come up with compelling arguments. Often, these arguments take their authority from what their audience regards as most respected. Sex, money, power, religion and others have been used according to the situation, as well as military intimidation.

The FF knew the English language of their time quite well and had, especially collectively, virtually total vocabulary capacity. They were able to precisely phrase what they wanted to communicate - to another instructed 18th century English speaker. That explains the terminology we find in their documents. It is highly philosophical and free of religious specificity. That they did not use certain words says as much as some of those they did.

The country has changed a lot since then. The language has changed a lot since then.

Our knowledge of communication, sensory perception, psychology and physics have brought us to a new, unique time.

Individuals have to understand more fully how we understand. From where does what we believe come? How did it enter into our being in such a way that we accept it as 'true', 'real', 'necessary'?

 

[California Girl]

it merely means rights as a human being by virtue of being alive.

No, idiot... not by being alive, but by being born in the United States of America.

So only Americans have the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

You're a fucking idiot.

I'm quietly confident that other countries can decide for themselves. It is nothing more than American arrogance to think we can decide what other people's rights are. They are not us and we are not them. We don't call their shots any more than they call ours.

The idiot here is you... unfortunately your idiocy is colored by arrogance. Ask the rest of the world if they think our Declaration of Independence applies to them. Fucking fool.

 

[Inthemiddle]

No, idiot... not by being alive, but by being born in the United States of America.

So only Americans have the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

You're a fucking idiot.

I'm quietly confident that other countries can decide for themselves. It is nothing more than American arrogance to think we can decide what other people's rights are. They are not us and we are not them. We don't call their shots any more than they call ours.

The idiot here is you... unfortunately your idiocy is colored by arrogance. Ask the rest of the world if they think our Declaration of Independence applies to them. Fucking fool.

Clearly CG sees rights as a construct of the government.

 

[SniperFire]

In or unalienable is a human concept.

Rights are a human concept.

Humans have the logical right to ascribe inalienable attributes to whatever rights they decide. Humans can decide that they want these selected rights to be accepted by other humans, even all other humans. To do that, they have to come up with compelling arguments. Often, these arguments take their authority from what their audience regards as most respected. Sex, money, power, religion and others have been used according to the situation.

The FF knew the English language of their time quite well and had, especially collectively, virtually total vocabulary capacity. They were able to precisely phrase what they wanted to communicate - to another instructed 18th century English speaker. That explains the terminology we find in their documents. It is highly philosophical and free of religious specificity. That they did not use certain words says as much as some of those they did.

The country has changed a lot since then. The language has changed a lot since then.

Our knowledge of communication, sensory perception, psychology and physics have brought us to a new, unique time.

Individuals have to understand more fully how we understand. From where does what we believe come? How did it enter into our being in such a way that we accept it as 'true', 'real', 'necessary'?

Humans can of course call anything an unalienable right.

I have the unalienable right to all of your money.

PM me and I will tell you where to send the check after you liquidate.

 

[Murf76]

No, idiot... not by being alive, but by being born in the United States of America.

So only Americans have the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

You're a fucking idiot.

I'm quietly confident that other countries can decide for themselves. It is nothing more than American arrogance to think we can decide what other people's rights are. They are not us and we are not them. We don't call their shots any more than they call ours.

The idiot here is you... unfortunately your idiocy is colored by arrogance. Ask the rest of the world if they think our Declaration of Independence applies to them. Fucking fool.

Is it immoral for, say... Iran to execute homosexuals for acts of homosexuality? If so, why?

 

[there4eyeM]

"Humans can of course call anything an unalienable right.

I have the unalienable right to all of your money.

PM me and I will tell you where to send the check after you liquidate."

We do not share the same concept of the right to that, and mine trumps yours.