Do our rights come from nature and God as Paul Ryan says?

[G.T.]

Nah, not really. I think "endowed by their Creator" is self explanatory, except maybe to dumbfucks like yourself who get confused opening a box of matches.

Do you need it spelled out with crayons and glitter glue?

"Endowed by their creator" is a philosophical statement, not a proven truth. Glad I could help, if you even yet understand what that means.

Creator is a capital 'C' in our foundational document. It is a proper name. .

i-dont-Care-about-your-nit-picking.

 

[manifold]

Abortion rights definitely come from God.

Or do they?

 

[G.T.]

Especially those governments presiding over an increasingly secular populace that rejects the notion that god is above government, and accepts that god is government.

This is hyperbole.

If you believe in God, you obviously think that he is above Government.

If you don't believe in God, your hyperbolic statement doesn't even apply.

More childish shit.

Irrelevant, as usual. The country was founded upon the idea that your rights come from God, not government.

Deal with it... if you choose to be godless heathen, so be it, that is your right. It does not however change the principle that this nation was founded upon.

Get over yourself.

And if you were a grown up, you'd know that this entire statement has nothing at all to do with the discussion.

 

[there4eyeM]

Saying man was 'meant to be free' is identical with saying 'man was meant to be dominated'. They can only be known one by the other.
All this you are thinking is taking place inside you. What you feel and think and believe are as close to you as your eyeballs.

 

[manifold]

The right to an attorney, appointed by the state if you can't afford one, most definitely comes from God too.

Or does it?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Nah, not really. I think "endowed by their Creator" is self explanatory, except maybe to dumbfucks like yourself who get confused opening a box of matches.

Do you need it spelled out with crayons and glitter glue?

"Endowed by their creator" is a philosophical statement, not a proven truth. Glad I could help, if you even yet understand what that means.

Creator is a capital 'C' in our foundational document. It is a proper name. .

So, now Gstring is reduced to moronic argument that since God cannot be proved to exist then the ideas of our Founding Fathers are meaningless.

 

[SniperFire]

Which is irrelevant to the philosophical question of where rights actually come from -

Our Founding Documents offer an opinion, and a Law regarding said source for our Nation - but as a philosophical question being debated, it's not been logically proven thus people questioning the origins of "rights" are well within the confines of "truth and logic."

The beauty of our system of guaranteeing unalienable rights though is that we're guaranteed THAT right as well, to believe what we want to believe. Note that the government is directly forbidden to "establish" a religion.

To say that these rights don't exist at all because one man believes they come from God and another from Nature is simply nonsense. One would have to embrace such notions as slavery as a natural right, a condition that people would not predictably struggle against and would not require force to maintain.

The bolded is the only part that makes a modicum of sense when attempting to discuss the origins of rights, and whether rights are an abstract idea of man or even provable at all through the confines of logic.

You are still swinging and missing. We are a theocracy, based on God.

We were not founded on theory 'provable at all though the confines of logic.'

But why not obfuscate and pretend you don't understand this for about the 12 time?

 

[beretta304]

All I know is that contrary to what he thinks...they don't come from Obama!

 

[manifold]

The right to due process, yup, handed down by God as well.

Or was it?

 

[G.T.]

Do you need it spelled out with crayons and glitter glue?

"Endowed by their creator" is a philosophical statement, not a proven truth. Glad I could help, if you even yet understand what that means.

Creator is a capital 'C' in our foundational document. It is a proper name. .

So, now Gstring is reduced to moronic argument that since God cannot be proved to exist then the ideas of our Founding Fathers are meaningless.

No, I didnt say their ideas were meaningless.

I said they were philosophical ideas, not infallable, thus open for discussion.

You're refusing to even DISCUSS them, acting like a high-school douchebag, and proving nothing except you're a dick-towel. Neat, 0.

 

[manifold]

The right to petition the government for redress of grievances is in the Torah, the Koran and the Old Testament.

Or is it?

 

[G.T.]

The beauty of our system of guaranteeing unalienable rights though is that we're guaranteed THAT right as well, to believe what we want to believe. Note that the government is directly forbidden to "establish" a religion.

To say that these rights don't exist at all because one man believes they come from God and another from Nature is simply nonsense. One would have to embrace such notions as slavery as a natural right, a condition that people would not predictably struggle against and would not require force to maintain.

The bolded is the only part that makes a modicum of sense when attempting to discuss the origins of rights, and whether rights are an abstract idea of man or even provable at all through the confines of logic.

You are still swinging and missing. We are a theocracy, based on God.


We were not founded on theory 'provable at all though the confines of logic.'

But why not obfuscate and pretend you don't understand this for about the 12 time?

What I made big should tell you you're a moron,

but besides that -

we're not arguing "what our nation was founded based upon,"

We're arguing where rights come from, and where was this proven, ever..................as a philosophical question.

You're sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "cuz da founda'z said so," without discussion. You're being a DOPE.

 

[Goodoledays]

The question they won't answer is which rights came from God.

God gave you the right to be born and breath, numbnuts.

I realize you Liberhoids think some "Chimp" created everything along the Evolution Highway.

Flaming ******* idiot...

So you have to believe in God not to be a liberhoid? Your way of putting things seems to make you what you say so called liberhoids are. Intolerance and narrow thinking seems to come from many who beilieve in God. What about those of us who are conservative on some issues. Do we have to believe in God and that he gave us these rights? It's nonsensical!

Well dude you are in America. You can believe anything you wan't. And if Romney indicates in his statement that God gave us those rights he has the right to. If you disagree then thats your business. Just like when Ubama declares 'You didn't build that' you can believe that too. If someone disagrees its their business. If one doesn't believe in God the same thing goes. If you think it is that important then have Ubama use it in his campaining. You know he would get nailed to the floor if he did. So watch out.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Universal/Natural rights are considered to be the right to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness...................Its the duty of elected bureaucrats to enact laws that support those unalienable rights and little else............

 

[SniperFire]

Abortion rights definitely come from God.

Or do they?

It is the most difficult question of all to answer.

But the debate is still about violation of our sovereign rights - given by God, regardless of which side you are on.

 

[there4eyeM]

What rights do you remember being born with?

 

[there4eyeM]

Did God give you your memories?

 

[manifold]

Abortion rights definitely come from God.

Or do they?

It is the most difficult question of all to answer.

But the debate is still about violation of our sovereign rights - given by God, regardless of which side you are on.

God didn't give anybody any 'rights' whatsoever. If there is a God, he gave us life, sentience and freewill. That's it.

 

[SniperFire]

The bolded is the only part that makes a modicum of sense when attempting to discuss the origins of rights, and whether rights are an abstract idea of man or even provable at all through the confines of logic.

You are still swinging and missing. We are a theocracy, based on God.


We were not founded on theory 'provable at all though the confines of logic.'

But why not obfuscate and pretend you don't understand this for about the 12 time?

[COLOR="Red"[SIZE="5"]]What I made big should tell you you're a moron,[/SIZE][/COLOR]

but besides that -

we're not arguing "what our nation was founded based upon,"

We're arguing where rights come from, and where was this proven, ever..................as a philosophical question.

You're sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "cuz da founda'z said so," without discussion. You're being a DOPE.

I made it big to kick you around some more.

America was founded on the premise that our individual freedoms and rights have been granted to us by a Supreme Creator of the Universe.

That, my friend, makes us a theocracy.

 

[Murf76]

The crux of murf's rant -

We are self-fruitful in the matter of our unalienable rights. They are that which we are BORN with as human beings. Not provided to us by other people or by governments.

So, in other words, I have the same rights as, say, an Afghani, a Russian, a Chinese. I have the same rights as a trillionaire or a bowry bum. Women have the same rights as men - regardless of which country they live in.

And, we, in the US, had all these rights before the American Revolution.

The gun nuts say they need all those guns so they can be ready to fight their own government. Never mind that they're going up against the biggest weapons known to humankind and all they'll have is little pea-shooter by comparison. That's what many of these idiots say.

If what YOU say were true, they have no need of their pea-shooters.

IOW, you could not be more wrong.

Humans fight for every right they have and they will always fight for them. If they don't, some government just might take them all away.

How is it do you think that the human rights of other peoples can be violated if they don't have any innately? Why would it be wrong for Afghans to stone women to death for immodesty if they can only put such a law on the books, or for communist governments to deny free speech? WHY is slavery innately WRONG?

The problem you people are having with developing an understanding of "unalienable rights" is that you can't push your collectivist ideology on people who's rights as an INDIVIDUAL are guaranteed. No one is fooled by your apparent confusion. If you can deny the fact that people have innate rights, you can justify any arbitrary social engineering you want. You can rob and redistribute without feeling like you're doing something wrong. But you are. If you weren't, you wouldn't be in the unenviable position of defending human rights violations just so long as some government codifies them into law.