God given rights?

[PratchettFan]

You are not suppossed to understand you are suppossed to believe. There is an old saying
" I had rather live my life as if there were a God and die and find out there isn't than to live my life as if there were NO God and die and find our there is"

Believing is not hard, it just requires accpetance.

I cannot believe what I find unbelievable. It is not hard, it is impossible.

 

[P@triot]

This country was founded on the principle of God given rights. If there are no God given rights, then just dissolve the country right now, it has no more reason to exist than cotton candy.

wherein the bible are the *god given rights *as in he constitution mentioned
life liberty and the pursuit of happiness that the *right* to vote the *right* of free speech where are they mentioned ???? man gave us those rights
other (god believing )nations dont have them

Man, I've seen some ironic posts by the idiot liberal that makes me laugh, but this might be one of the all time greats.

The first thing you mention in the Constitution is the right to life. #6 in the Ten Commandments: Thou Shall Not Kill

Yeah, you're right - absolutely no where to be found in the bible

 

[JohnA]

Sure He does. He certainly intervened a lot during the American Revolution. Ive already pointed out some real events where He was active. If it wasnt for the Hand of Divine Providence Washington and the army would have been crushed within months. The Founders certainly recognized and thanked God for his merciful intervention in the cause of their liberty.

The problem is too many people expect to just ask with out taking any effort on their own. They think talking with God is like ordering a pizza. They say what they want and they expect Him to deliver it with no effort on their part. That's not how God works. It never has been.

A covenant relationship requires action, thought, effort on our part. Not to "save" ourselves. But the preparation to let God work through us is something people completely neglect.

Instead of humbling ourselves, we act with pride. Instead of being grateful, we are covetous. Instead of being honest, we lie when it suits us.

God is bound when we do what He says. He has to bless us with the promises He has promised. But when we dont do what He says we have no promise.

Nonsense. What got us through was a long supply line on the part of the British and a large area to patrol. Not to mention they were fighting against what they saw was their own people. Human beings won that conflict, just as other human beings lost it. God was not on either side. God does not intervene.

Can you prove God does not intervene ?

can you prove he does ?

 

[JohnA]

If Americans believe in personal freedom, how can they deny a woman's right to control her own body?

They can do whatever they want with their body. It's the body of the unborn child that they dont have a right to terminate.

Until the woman gives birth to the fetus, the fetus is part of a woman's body.

correct it is not considered a person by any laws until it crys *live birth *

 

[JohnA]

They can do whatever they want with their body. It's the body of the unborn child that they dont have a right to terminate.

Until the woman gives birth to the fetus, the fetus is part of a woman's body.

If that were the case, the fetus would have her DNA signature, and not one unique unto itself

so sperm has DNA is that a person too ????

 

[PratchettFan]

Until the woman gives birth to the fetus, the fetus is part of a woman's body.

If that were the case, the fetus would have her DNA signature, and not one unique unto itself

so sperm has DNA is that a person too ????

Sperm does not have a unique DNA. It is just cells from the man's body. The fetus has DNA unique unto itself. It is a seperate human being.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Further, the Founders most certainly would not agree with you. They would laugh at your sophomoric drivel. The Lockean philosophy of government, the theory that guided them, begins with (1) the derivation of humans rights—Divinity—and proceeds to (2) the general consent of the governed. You confound two distinct things. You are deluded and ignorant about the philosophical origins and logical prerequisites of an enduring democratic rule of law.

I know a number of atheists who are not so stupid. While they do not believe that God exists, they are wise enough to embrace the Lockean philosophy of government as though He did, recognizing, from historical experience and the self-evident fundamentals of realty, the collectivist and statist nature of the alternative.

But of course they are not silly leftists, but classical liberals like myself.

It wasn't called "The Enlightment" for nothing..

And it's awfully hard to dismiss Natural Rights when the concept in its entirety ended up being the undoing of the Monarchs and the beginning of Modern Democracies.

But you can try (I guess) by tying it to "stupid religious zealots" as a few on this thread have tried to do. As M.D. Rawlings is telling you -- it's not about prayer or a specific religion. It's actually about the self-preservation instinct in Classic Liberals that spawns a basic mistrust of power..

Exactly. Though Locke did derive his political theory from the socio-political ramifications of Judeo-Christianity's moral system of thought, those ramifications are theologically and politically neutral. God is the Source and Guarantor of human rights, not the state; hence, the state may not abridge certain inherent, inalienable rights. If it does, it is not merely the people's right, but their duty, to overthrow it. Only the foolish rely on or worship the state.

 

[bodecea]

If that were the case, the fetus would have her DNA signature, and not one unique unto itself

so sperm has DNA is that a person too ????

Sperm does not have a unique DNA. It is just cells from the man's body. The fetus has DNA unique unto itself. It is a seperate human being.

Sperm is not "cells"...it is 1/2 cell with 1/2 DNA.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Senator Paul Ryan. Senator, GOP leader, writer of budgets.

In this little interview he says rights come from god and are not given by governments. That may be true but God is incredibly bad at keeping those rights for his people and never once has he intervened, personally, to lend a hand. It has always been our job to raise the armies, take the casualties and shoulder the burden while God sits idly by without even a muted cheer.

Even the founders knew better. The declaration states that, "to secure these rights governments are instituted among men". I guess there is no need for those first ten amendments to the constitution either. With god on our side who the hell needs a Bill of Rights?

Being an atheist god and I have a tenuous relationship and if Ryan does not mind I prefer a rule of law to a theocracy.

Ryan is here

Paul Ryan: Repeal health law because rights come from God | The Raw Story

The declaration is here. (Although our patriotic and learned rightwingnuts should have no need of verification. This holy text should be burned into their memory if not their soul)

Declaration of Independence - Text Transcript

You being an atheist you have no relationship with God. Being that Governments are instituted among men to protect our rights, this current government is failing miserably.

 

[DiamondDave]

Until the woman gives birth to the fetus, the fetus is part of a woman's body.

If that were the case, the fetus would have her DNA signature, and not one unique unto itself

so sperm has DNA is that a person too ????

No.. it does not have full unique DNA.. perhaps you should have studied in school more what gametes are

 

[bodecea]

Senator Paul Ryan. Senator, GOP leader, writer of budgets.

In this little interview he says rights come from god and are not given by governments. That may be true but God is incredibly bad at keeping those rights for his people and never once has he intervened, personally, to lend a hand. It has always been our job to raise the armies, take the casualties and shoulder the burden while God sits idly by without even a muted cheer.

Even the founders knew better. The declaration states that, "to secure these rights governments are instituted among men". I guess there is no need for those first ten amendments to the constitution either. With god on our side who the hell needs a Bill of Rights?

Being an atheist god and I have a tenuous relationship and if Ryan does not mind I prefer a rule of law to a theocracy.

Ryan is here

Paul Ryan: Repeal health law because rights come from God | The Raw Story

The declaration is here. (Although our patriotic and learned rightwingnuts should have no need of verification. This holy text should be burned into their memory if not their soul)

Declaration of Independence - Text Transcript

You being an atheist you have no relationship with God. Being that Governments are instituted among men to protect our rights, this current government is failing miserably.

which god now?

 

[DiamondDave]

If there was a way to remove the fetus, you would have no argument from me on that as well. As I said, it is a conflict between two rights. I do not deny the fetus' right to life, I only deny that it supercedes the woman's right to personal sovereignty.

However, if the woman is being forced it is involuntary. That is the definition of involuntary.

As to other responsibilities, please point out one in this country that you can't back out of. As a parent, you can give up your kids. Financially, you can declare bankruptcy. If I offer you my kidney to save your life, I can change my mind on the day of surgery and there is nothing to force me to go through with it even if it means you die. If I sign an employment contract, I can quit any time I like. So what other responsibility is there where you are forced to go through with it regardless of your desires?

I don't WANT to pay for the damages I do to your property

I don't WANT to be convicted of manslaughter for the actions that I took that cost you your life

I don't WANT to pay for that which I signed a legal and binding contract to purchase

And sorry, you are still responsible for your kids until they are relieved from you and put into the care of another or made a ward of the state... and if you do not, you may not WANT to be held responsible for what happens to them, but you are indeed held responsible.... regardless of whether that child is 4 months from birth or 4 months after birth

And if the woman involuntarily was forced to commit the act that led to her pregnancy, you would have a point.. a point that I would concede as a real head scratcher in the decision to terminate a pregnancy...

But in this world, you live with the consequences to your actions, even if it is a burden to you and even if you don't WANT to

Again, if you file bankruptcy then you don't have to pay for the first and third example you gave.

As to the second, do you really equate sex with crime and pregnancy as punishment?

Forcing someone to place their person in the service of another is involuntary servitude. That is the definition. Perhaps you are able to justify that in your own mind, but I cannot in mine.

Perhaps you should understand that every parent is a servant... and every parent who purposely had sex did it voluntarily... and that we are indeed responsible for the consequences of our actions.. a consequence of sex is the very possible creation for a life that you are indeed responsible for

Even bankruptcy has consequences.. INCLUDING the confiscation and sale of most property/possessions... or in the case of a chapter 13 you are put on a schedule for payment while you keep your possessions.. .and then just try and cheat on your bankruptcy and see what consequences come from that

 

[DiamondDave]

If we had all these "inalienable rights" we sure wouldn't need governments to secure them....would we?

Inalienable right is an oxymoron. All rights can be taken away therefore there are no inalienable rights.

Again

A right given only by man or the created government of man could subsequently be taken away.... when you deem a right as inalienable and given by a power or authority higher than man, you are basically saying that no matter what man may do, deep down all of mankind still should have that right

Every child should have a warm bed, a solid roof and three hot meals a day. Every child should have an education as far as they can go. Every child should have adequate medical care. Every human being should have shelter and food. There are all sorts of shoulds. Any of those you could say are inalienable rights. But none of them exist unless human beings provide them. You have no rights unless the society in which you live acknowledges them. You can say you should as much as you like, but it matters not at all.

Shoulds are not rights

And the protection of an inalienable right is so that it is protected from government.. and by stating that this comes from a being or higher power beyond what man is, takes it away from the man made government which is by human nature fallible... your right to live the way you choose, by your actions, and without being murdered does not come from government.. we were indeed created to live and act on our own.. and that creation did not come from government

 

[DiamondDave]

There is no such thing as natural rights. There are only rights you obtain and keep by blood.

Wow -- I thought only free-market defending, knuckle dragging Cons believed in the law of the Jungle and "Might makes Right". Another reason I wouldn't want to march with you in civil disobedience..

I didn't know it was that easy to dismiss a concept like Natural Rights.. Here -- lemme try.

There's no such thing as The Social Compact.. I never signed up... Wow -- I feel better now..

Sorry. You didn't have to sign. It's imprinted in your genes. Tough luck.

Please show any evidence of social compact in our genes or DNA... and please show this in any other animal as well, or where it stemmed from in DNA evolution or mutation

 

[P@triot]

If that were the case, the fetus would have her DNA signature, and not one unique unto itself

so sperm has DNA is that a person too ????

Sperm does not have a unique DNA. It is just cells from the man's body. The fetus has DNA unique unto itself. It is a seperate human being.

Now don't go around giving facts! Don't you know liberals hate facts?

 

[Plasmaball]

I don't WANT to pay for the damages I do to your property

I don't WANT to be convicted of manslaughter for the actions that I took that cost you your life

I don't WANT to pay for that which I signed a legal and binding contract to purchase

And sorry, you are still responsible for your kids until they are relieved from you and put into the care of another or made a ward of the state... and if you do not, you may not WANT to be held responsible for what happens to them, but you are indeed held responsible.... regardless of whether that child is 4 months from birth or 4 months after birth

And if the woman involuntarily was forced to commit the act that led to her pregnancy, you would have a point.. a point that I would concede as a real head scratcher in the decision to terminate a pregnancy...

But in this world, you live with the consequences to your actions, even if it is a burden to you and even if you don't WANT to

Again, if you file bankruptcy then you don't have to pay for the first and third example you gave.

As to the second, do you really equate sex with crime and pregnancy as punishment?

Forcing someone to place their person in the service of another is involuntary servitude. That is the definition. Perhaps you are able to justify that in your own mind, but I cannot in mine.

Perhaps you should understand that every parent is a servant... and every parent who purposely had sex did it voluntarily... and that we are indeed responsible for the consequences of our actions.. a consequence of sex is the very possible creation for a life that you are indeed responsible for

Even bankruptcy has consequences.. INCLUDING the confiscation and sale of most property/possessions... or in the case of a chapter 13 you are put on a schedule for payment while you keep your possessions.. .and then just try and cheat on your bankruptcy and see what consequences come from that

Servant? **** you. I am not a servant to my kids. The fact you have that type of outlook on kids means you shouldn't be a parent.

Every parent who had sex did it voluntarily? Again **** you and good job at insulting every rape victim who carried they fetus to term. You are a real piece of shit.

Yes having sex means you could become a parent,and in the end that result is none of your concern should they choose to remove said issue.

Don't have children,it would be insulting to us parents.

 

[Plasmaball]

If that were the case, the fetus would have her DNA signature, and not one unique unto itself

so sperm has DNA is that a person too ????

Sperm does not have a unique DNA. It is just cells from the man's body. The fetus has DNA unique unto itself. It is a seperate human being.

Uh no. The male carries half the dna and the female carries the other half...

Basic info people....basic info...

 

[DiamondDave]

Again, if you file bankruptcy then you don't have to pay for the first and third example you gave.

As to the second, do you really equate sex with crime and pregnancy as punishment?

Forcing someone to place their person in the service of another is involuntary servitude. That is the definition. Perhaps you are able to justify that in your own mind, but I cannot in mine.

Perhaps you should understand that every parent is a servant... and every parent who purposely had sex did it voluntarily... and that we are indeed responsible for the consequences of our actions.. a consequence of sex is the very possible creation for a life that you are indeed responsible for

Even bankruptcy has consequences.. INCLUDING the confiscation and sale of most property/possessions... or in the case of a chapter 13 you are put on a schedule for payment while you keep your possessions.. .and then just try and cheat on your bankruptcy and see what consequences come from that

Servant? **** you. I am not a servant to my kids. The fact you have that type of outlook on kids means you shouldn't be a parent.

Every parent who had sex did it voluntarily? Again **** you and good job at insulting every rape victim who carried they fetus to term. You are a real piece of shit.

Yes having sex means you could become a parent,and in the end that result is none of your concern should they choose to remove said issue.

Don't have children,it would be insulting to us parents.

1) We do serve our kids... taking care of their every need (not every want)... and it is the responsibility of a parent
2) Notice that I used the words PURPOSELY HAD SEX, idiot
3) If you are a parent, being that liberal and that stupid, there is nothing I can really say to demonstrate my despair... just, facepalm
4) The result IS a concern as the result is a human.. just like when someone tries to murder any other human
5) And I am damn glad I have raised my kids to take care of themselves, be responsible for their actions, and live their life with honor... you know.. the exact opposite of everything you stand for

 

[flacaltenn]

Senator Paul Ryan. Senator, GOP leader, writer of budgets.

In this little interview he says rights come from god and are not given by governments. That may be true but God is incredibly bad at keeping those rights for his people and never once has he intervened, personally, to lend a hand. It has always been our job to raise the armies, take the casualties and shoulder the burden while God sits idly by without even a muted cheer.

Even the founders knew better. The declaration states that, "to secure these rights governments are instituted among men". I guess there is no need for those first ten amendments to the constitution either. With god on our side who the hell needs a Bill of Rights?

Being an atheist god and I have a tenuous relationship and if Ryan does not mind I prefer a rule of law to a theocracy.

Ryan is here

Paul Ryan: Repeal health law because rights come from God | The Raw Story

The declaration is here. (Although our patriotic and learned rightwingnuts should have no need of verification. This holy text should be burned into their memory if not their soul)

Declaration of Independence - Text Transcript

The construct that the rights of men are derived from God, not the government, is the antithesis of theocracy. The rule of law wherein the powers of the government are emphatically delineated and limited follows from that. The only theocracies, as it were, are those societies that do not heed the only authentic Source and Guarantor of human rights. Such are inevitably subject to statist governments.

Further, the Founders most certainly would not agree with you. They would laugh at your sophomoric drivel. The Lockean philosophy of government, the theory that guided them, begins with (1) the derivation of humans rights—Divinity—and proceeds to (2) the general consent of the governed. You confound two distinct things. You are deluded and ignorant about the philosophical origins and logical prerequisites of an enduring democratic rule of law.

I know a number of atheists who are not so stupid. While they do not believe that God exists, they are wise enough to embrace the Lockean philosophy of government as though He did, recognizing, from historical experience and the self-evident fundamentals of realty, the collectivist and statist nature of the alternative.

But of course they are not silly leftists, but classical liberals like myself.

What drivel! I am not arguing against either religion or government. Government is necessary and what kind is paramount. It is the drivel that god gives us "inalienable rights" I find depressing.

I don't care how many. or few gods you believe in just keep your theology out of government. To imply that god is giving us our rights is as unprovable as it is ridiculous.

For what it is worth there is not one objective fact that supports the existence of god, any god.

So atheists must be really embarrassed by the Enlightenment. I can just see the atheists of the 18th Century trying to shut them up with all that Creator drivel - just praise the King and STFU.

The really foolish ones today are the ones who trust government institutions with their lives, liberties and property. The ones who admire the wisdom, the integrity of our politicians and the infallability of our judicial system.

Seems to me that atheists know no humility. They THINK they're in charge of their lives, liberty, etc. But there's always those times when people break and learn some humility.

It's that moment when the entire countries of people discover they've been had by the Power they ceded to government. How many can you count in just the last Century onecut? Folks getting on their knees and weeping for having been so proud of themselves in a cause that now looks foolish...

A little humility is a NECESSARY ingredient for a country founded in the manner that we were...

 

[Plasmaball]

Perhaps you should understand that every parent is a servant... and every parent who purposely had sex did it voluntarily... and that we are indeed responsible for the consequences of our actions.. a consequence of sex is the very possible creation for a life that you are indeed responsible for

Even bankruptcy has consequences.. INCLUDING the confiscation and sale of most property/possessions... or in the case of a chapter 13 you are put on a schedule for payment while you keep your possessions.. .and then just try and cheat on your bankruptcy and see what consequences come from that

Servant? **** you. I am not a servant to my kids. The fact you have that type of outlook on kids means you shouldn't be a parent.

Every parent who had sex did it voluntarily? Again **** you and good job at insulting every rape victim who carried they fetus to term. You are a real piece of shit.

Yes having sex means you could become a parent,and in the end that result is none of your concern should they choose to remove said issue.

Don't have children,it would be insulting to us parents.

1) We do serve our kids... taking care of their every need (not every want)... and it is the responsibility of a parent
2) Notice that I used the words PURPOSELY HAD SEX, idiot
3) If you are a parent, being that liberal and that stupid, there is nothing I can really say to demonstrate my despair... just, facepalm
4) The result IS a concern as the result is a human.. just like when someone tries to murder any other human

1) I will never "serve" my kids.
2) the rapist is purposely having sex....
3) i am a parent, and being liberal or conservative has little to do with whatever point you are talking about.
4) its not murder, and its not a human being, and its none of your business. Nanny state losers like you are whats wrong with this nation. Your willingness to expand government to control people is anti-freedom.