God given rights. Do you really have any?

[Penelope]

Yep, you could never handle the vass amount of information stored in it.

Probably not, but at least I can put the beer down long enough to type, know how to spell "vast," and how to spellcheck.

At least I can do that much.

My mind thinks too fast for my fingers and your mind.

 

[Penelope]

God given rights. Do you really have any?

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.

When a right is given to us by governments, they assume and have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. If governments do not accept and do this enforcement duty, then citizens have a corrupted government.

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. The fact that they often are, indicates that he is shirking his duty.

To me, rights are like laws, completely useless and worthless unless they can be enforced by a given power when they are breached.

Do you have any real god given rights, or are god given rights just a feel-good lie that we tell ourselves we have so as to ignore that we have none?

Regards
DL

Well it is a funny thing. When you ask a godless Leftist if we have rights that empower the state to "help" people, they will spout off a bunch of rights, such as the right to health care, the right to abortions, the right to vote, etc.

However, if you try to mention rights of the individual that limit government power they will say that such rights don't really exist.

In short, they want their cake and eat it too.

Well the governments give us rights and takes them away.
And the republicans think they have a right to own a gun or rifle (without background checks) and do mass shootings, and the republicans think they have a right who can get married, and who gets healthcare or not.

See how that works.

Even California said no to gay marriage

and they were the first state to recognize it. Only the anti gay ? religious freaks were against it. Its a legal issue, not a moral one.

The supreme court forced it on California..

But you already knew that

So see how you republicans like to act, like you are gods and gay marriage is not forced on anyone.
Its a legal issue, not a moral one.

 

[GreatestIam]

God given rights. Do you really have any?

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.

When a right is given to us by governments, they assume and have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. If governments do not accept and do this enforcement duty, then citizens have a corrupted government.

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. The fact that they often are, indicates that he is shirking his duty.

To me, rights are like laws, completely useless and worthless unless they can be enforced by a given power when they are breached.

Do you have any real god given rights, or are god given rights just a feel-good lie that we tell ourselves we have so as to ignore that we have none?

Regards
DL

we have God given rights .

Good.

Can you name the rights you are talking about please?

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

The rights people actually have are derived directly from the forbearance of the governments they live under.

I agree.

I take it that you would not sign the U.S. constitution as written. Right?

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

General Moses gave laws to his community of followers. We do not have God given laws.

Rights are not laws, exactly, so I will take this as there are no god given rights.

I take it that you would not sign the U.S. constitution as written. Right?

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

You are shirking your duty if you don't ensure your rights aren't taken from you.

We basically agree so I do not know why you put a gratuitous insult. If you want to continue that, fuck off.

If you want to chat, know that I have been denied my right to council in a court and was forced to defend myself.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

Come try to take mine. I'll show you what rights I have.

If you have not fucked off and have changed your shitty attitude, what god given right do you think you have.

Regards
DL

 

[toobfreak]

Yep, you could never handle the vass amount of information stored in it.

Probably not, but at least I can put the beer down long enough to type, know how to spell "vast," and how to spellcheck.

At least I can do that much.

My mind thinks too fast for my fingers and your mind.

I can believe the part about your fingers. Frankly, every time I see you comment on one of my posts I'm impressed. I'm amazed you actually still manage to kind of sort of follow threads.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

God given rights. Do you really have any?

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.

When a right is given to us by governments, they assume and have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. If governments do not accept and do this enforcement duty, then citizens have a corrupted government.

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. The fact that they often are, indicates that he is shirking his duty.

To me, rights are like laws, completely useless and worthless unless they can be enforced by a given power when they are breached.

Do you have any real god given rights, or are god given rights just a feel-good lie that we tell ourselves we have so as to ignore that we have none?

Regards
DL

Given the fact there is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists, there are no ‘god given’ rights.

Our rights are inalienable, they manifest the consequence of our humanity – rights can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

Although inalienable, our rights are not unlimited or absolute, they are subject to lawful limits and restrictions by government.

Rights subject to lawful restrictions have not been ‘taken’ or ‘lost.’

 

[Shelzin]

Come try to take mine. I'll show you what rights I have.

If you have not fucked off and have changed your shitty attitude, what god given right do you think you have.

Regards
DL

All of them... None of them. Did you miss the first paragraph in my post? It's in the same post that you quoted.

If you think I have a shitty attitude now, I suggest you put me on ignore... It doesn't get better than this. It's not like I'm you attacking here. I said my opinion, if that triggered you somehow... You're going hate me.

 

[GreatestIam]

God given rights. Do you really have any?

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.

When a right is given to us by governments, they assume and have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. If governments do not accept and do this enforcement duty, then citizens have a corrupted government.

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. The fact that they often are, indicates that he is shirking his duty.

To me, rights are like laws, completely useless and worthless unless they can be enforced by a given power when they are breached.

Do you have any real god given rights, or are god given rights just a feel-good lie that we tell ourselves we have so as to ignore that we have none?

Regards
DL

Well it is a funny thing. When you ask a godless Leftist if we have rights that empower the state to "help" people, they will spout off a bunch of rights, such as the right to health care, the right to abortions, the right to vote, etc.

However, if you try to mention rights of the individual that limit government power they will say that such rights don't really exist.

In short, they want their cake and eat it too.

Both camps have their godless. The right is more hypocritical than the left.

If you have a god, did he give you any rights?

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

The rights people actually have are derived directly from the forbearance of the governments they live under.

Then you have privileges and are a subject, not a free man.....The exact opposite of what was supposed to be set forth in 1786.

We have all decided to give up freedom for the security that liberty gives.

You have a Statue of Liberty, not of freedom, and you would not vote for freedom as you would not want to live where you had to always be fearful of your neighbor.

Freedom, for tribal humans is impossible.

Regards
DL

 

[occupied]

The rights people actually have are derived directly from the forbearance of the governments they live under.

I agree.

I take it that you would not sign the U.S. constitution as written. Right?

Regards
DL

There are countries around the world that have constitutions modeled closely on ours but they don't mean anything to how free a people actually are. A system of laws and rights mean practically nothing when an elite controls everything and the laws do not equally apply to them. In this country it is not difficult to find many instances where connections, money and influence make all the difference when a person is in jeopardy of the law. When your very freedom is at stake in America we are little better than a banana republic. Being able to write big checks buys an awful lot of rights under the law. Being a poor nobody means you are guilty under the law. Period. The fact that we allow the elites to buy their way out of trouble is the biggest threat to freedom we have.

 

[Shelzin]

You are shirking your duty if you don't ensure your rights aren't taken from you.

We basically agree so I do not know why you put a gratuitous insult. If you want to continue that, fuck off.

What insult?

If you want to chat, know that I have been denied my right to council in a court and was forced to defend myself.

Regards
DL

I have no idea what you are talking about... But if you are denied your right to council, I'll waive mine so we are on even footing. It's how I was going to do it anyway.... o.0

 

[Andylusion]

God given rights. Do you really have any?

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.

When a right is given to us by governments, they assume and have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. If governments do not accept and do this enforcement duty, then citizens have a corrupted government.

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. The fact that they often are, indicates that he is shirking his duty.

To me, rights are like laws, completely useless and worthless unless they can be enforced by a given power when they are breached.

Do you have any real god given rights, or are god given rights just a feel-good lie that we tell ourselves we have so as to ignore that we have none?

Regards
DL

The problem with government given rights, is that you assume this means the government will ensure those rights.

The problem is, if government is the only reason you have them, then government can deny you those rights whenever it pleases.

Throughout all human history, governments have proclaimed themselves to be benefactors, at a the exact same time as claiming to be benefactors, went about every method of abusing the public they claimed to be benefactors for.

Again, if your only rights are given to you by government, then government can take those rights away.

This is one of the huge schizophrenic aspects of left-wing ideology, generally speaking. They say that government regulation and control is fine, because the government is "us".

But then they'll turn right around and complain that politicians serve their own political interests, that corporations have influence, that government agencies all act according to their own values.

AOC being the mindless idiot she is, actually argued both of those. In one video she said "Government is us! Government is the public", and then in another attacked government regulators as having endless conflicts of interest. Wait, I thought government was "us"? It never ends with AOC, because she'll double talk every point she's ever made.

My point though, is that saying that government gave you those rights, implies that government has to power to give, and take, rights.

This is how all tyrannical governments exist. If they can give you a right, they can take it as well.

The United States was different, because we said government isn't the source of our rights. Government is merely to enforce the rights we already have.

In 1689, Locke argued in his Two Treatises of Government that political society existed for the sake of protecting "property", which he defined as a person's "life, liberty, and estate"

This is why it is vital that rights remain, not of government, but of our creator. Because the moment we put the power of determine what is or is not a right, in the hands of human government, humans will abuse that power, and deny rights when it is convenient to do so.

 

[Aletheia4u]

Exodus 1:11 So they put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh. But the more they were oppressed, the more they multiplied and spread; so the Egyptians came to dread the Israelites

Exodus 3:9 And now the cry of the Israelites has reached me, and I have seen the way the Egyptians are oppressing them

1 Samuel 8:11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots.

 

[Baron]

God given rights. Do you really have any?

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.

When a right is given to us by governments, they assume and have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. If governments do not accept and do this enforcement duty, then citizens have a corrupted government.

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. The fact that they often are, indicates that he is shirking his duty.

To me, rights are like laws, completely useless and worthless unless they can be enforced by a given power when they are breached.

Do you have any real god given rights, or are god given rights just a feel-good lie that we tell ourselves we have so as to ignore that we have none?

Regards
DL

Only God gives us our rights, most of governments are from devil and they always try to take our rights back. E.g. Covid-19 hoax

 

[harmonica]

still- no god

Thank you, Johnny One-Note. Have you discussed your obsession with your therapist?

no god--sorry--you people keep replying but provide no evidence
hahahahahahahhah

 

[ding]

God given rights. Do you really have any?

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.

When a right is given to us by governments, they assume and have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. If governments do not accept and do this enforcement duty, then citizens have a corrupted government.

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. The fact that they often are, indicates that he is shirking his duty.

To me, rights are like laws, completely useless and worthless unless they can be enforced by a given power when they are breached.

Do you have any real god given rights, or are god given rights just a feel-good lie that we tell ourselves we have so as to ignore that we have none?

Regards
DL

Absolutely. We are granted inalienable rights for no other reason than we are God's creatures. But these rights are conditional upon our serving our duty to God to be virtuous.

 

[ding]

still- no god

Thank you, Johnny One-Note. Have you discussed your obsession with your therapist?

no god--sorry--you people keep replying but provide no evidence
hahahahahahahhah

I provided the evidence dozens of times. You are the one who has no evidence. hahahahahahahhah

At the heart of this debate is whether or not the material world was created by spirit. If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive.

So we need to start from that position and examine the evidence we have at our disposal which is creation itself. Specifically, the laws of nature; physical, biological and moral. And how space and time has evolved. And how we perceive God.

If we perceive God to be some magical fairy tale then everything we see will skew to that result. There won't be one single thing that we will agree with or accept. Whereas if we were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world we would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

But since this is my argument we will use my perception of God. Which is there no thing that can describe God because God is no thing. God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit. A spirit is no thing. Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness. That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

So now that a realistic perception of God has been established we need to examine the only evidence at our disposal. It should be obvious that if the material world were not created by spirit that everything that has unfolded in the evolution of space and time would have no intentional purpose. That it is just matter and energy doing what matter and energy do. Conversely, if the material world were created by spirit it should be obvious that the creation of the material world was intentional. After all in my perception of God, God is no thing and the closest thing I can relate to is a mind with no body. Using our own experiences as creators as a proxy, we know that when we create things we create them for a reason and that reason is to serve some purpose. So it would be no great leap of logic to believe that something like a mind with no body would do the same. We also know from our experiences that intelligence tends to create intelligence. We are obsessed with making smart things. So what better thing for a mind with no body to do than create a universe where beings with bodies can create smart things too.

We have good reason to believe that we find ourselves in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises inevitably, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. Yet were any one of a number of the physical properties of our universe otherwise - some of them basic, others seemingly trivial, almost accidental - that life, which seems now to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere. It takes no great imagination to conceive of other possible universes, each stable and workable in itself, yet lifeless. How is it that, with so many other apparent options, we are in a universe that possesses just that peculiar nexus of properties that breeds beings that know and create.

The biological laws are such that life is programmed to survive and multiply which is a requisite for intelligence to arise. If the purpose of the universe was to create intelligence then a preference in nature for it had to exist. The Laws of Nature are such that the potential for intelligence to existed the moment space and time were created. One can argue that given the laws of nature and the size of the universe that intelligence arising was inevitable. One can also argue that creating intelligence from nothing defies the Second Law of Entropy. That creating intelligence from nothing increases order within the universe. It actually doesn't because usable energy was lost along the way as a cost of creating order from disorder. But it is nature overriding it's tendency for ever increasing disorder that interests me and raises my suspicions to look deeper and to take seriously the proposition that a mind without a body created the material world so that minds with bodies could create too.

If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.

All we have done so far is to make a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we assume that everything I have described was just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

If the universe were created through natural process and we are an accidental happenstance of matter and energy doing what matter and energy do, then there should be no expectation for absolute morals. Morals can be anything we want them to be. The problem is that nature does have a preference for an outcome. Societies and people which behave with virtue experience order and harmony. Societies and people which behave without virtue experience disorder and chaos. So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work. If the universe was created by spirit for the express purpose of creating beings that know and create we would expect that we would receive feedback on how we behave. The problem is that violating moral laws are not like violating physical laws. When we violate a physical law the consequences are immediate. If you try to defy gravity by jumping off a roof you will fall. Whereas the consequences for violating a moral law are more probabilistic in nature; many times we get away with it.

Morals are effectively standards. For any given thing there exists a standard which is the highest possible standard. This standard exists independent of anything else. It is in effect a universal standard. It exists for a reason. When we deviate from this standard and normalize our deviance from the standard, eventually the reason the standard exists will be discovered. The reason this happens is because error cannot stand. Eventually error will fail and the truth will be discovered. Thus proving that morals cannot be anything we want them to be but are indeed based upon some universal code of common decency that is independent of man.

So the question that naturally begs to be asked is if there is a universal code of common decency that is independent of man how come we all don't behave the same way when it comes to right and wrong? The reason man doesn't behave the same way is because of subjectivity. The difference between being objective and being subjective is bias. Bias is eliminated when there is no preference for an outcome. To eliminate a preference for an outcome one must have no thought of the consequences to one's self. If one does not practice this they will see subjective truth instead of objective truth. Subjective truth leads to moral relativism. Where consequences to self and preferences for an outcome leads to rationalizations of right and wrong.

Man does know right from wrong and when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong he rationalizes he did not violate it. You can see this behavior in almost all quarrels and disagreements. At the heart of every quarrel and disagreement is a belief in a universal right and wrong. So even though each side believes right to be different each side expects the other to believe their side should be universally known and accepted. It is this behavior which tells us there is an expectation for an absolute truth.

If there were never a universal truth that existed man would never have an expectation of fairness to begin with because fairness would have no meaning. The fact that each of us has an expectation of fairness and that we expect everyone else to follow ought to raise our suspicion on the origin of that expectation.

#winning