Zone1 What are "Rights"? Should we allow them to the other side?

[Zincwarrior]

It doesn't mean we shouldn't do those things, it's just important to not imprint the idea onto leftism and assume they'll act in kind, because they won't. It's like when humans imprint human-characteristics onto animals, but then get mauled by a bear. Average, moderate voters need to know this.

There's no reason why a leftist progressive wouldn't take your rights away, there's no higher moral foundation. If they desire it, they'll do it. It's 3rd world justice in government.

Both parties are doing it. To think your party is blameless lacks sanity.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Both parties are doing it. To think your party is blameless lacks sanity.

1. Where exactly are Christians/Conservatives trying to take away rights of humans?
2. Even if there was an instance, the ideology defines rights as something above human manipulation, so there's no way you could just equivocate Conservatism's view of rights with the progressive left. They are completely opposite.

 

[Zincwarrior]

1. Where exactly are Christians/Conservatives trying to take away rights of humans?
2. Even if there was an instance, the ideology defines rights as something above human manipulation, so there's no way you could just equivocate Conservatism's view of rights with the progressive left. They are completely opposite.

Yea yea whatever. The politicians are interchangeable and would sell you down the river for a roll of nickels.

MAGA are not conservatives. They are populists

 

[alang1216]

Then by your ideology, you'd have to support slavery. By mine, even if the majority wanted it, it would stay illegal.

I would not have to support it but I would have to accept that it is legal.

 

[alang1216]

No they're not. They're inalienable. They're innate.

The government is supposed to recognize them, not grant them.

So life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? You can forfeit your life or liberty for certain crimes. So says the Bible so they don't sound inalienable to me. There are plenty of things that might make you happy that you are forbidden.

Is free speech or the right to bear arms anywhere in the bible?

 

[Crepitus]

Many worldviews have many opinions on what rights are. The communist and leftist often recites that rights are what can be enforced, or what the majority of people believe. Conservatives believe basic human rights (The bill of rights) are above man and are a manifestation of the will of a Creator or higher being (aka God), and thus can't be touched.

This creates an interesting atheist/communist/leftist vs. Christian/Conservative scenario.

If the former thinks rights are based only in what man thinks, and what they can enforce, or at the very least based it on what a majority believes... that really has no base, it's based on nothing.

And if your rights are based on nothing, then they can become anything. They can be given, they can be changed, they can be taken away.. whether it by the latest leftist tyrant or by a misled populace.

Now, as a Christian Conservative, I believe in rights for all people, but it's important to point out that it is the much higher road. My worldview would require me to give rights to people I oppose, when my opposition wouldn't think twice of taking away my rights if they had the power to do so.

My question is this: If Christian populism continues to succeed, and the social movement to not just shape the government how I/we want, but also shame and stigmatize immoral behavior, becomes prominent... How could a leftist/atheist/communist have any problem with that?

They ought to respect it, because they would do the exact same thing.

As much as they don't like to admit it, they would rely on the benevolence of Christians, even though they would offer none back. They would be as cold as necessary to enforce what they want.

Define "immoral behavior".

I suspect that our definition will be pretty far apart.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

I would not have to support it but I would have to accept that it is legal.

Exactly. So in your leftist/progressive society, slavery would be legal. And next door, in my Christian society, it would be illegal.

Now take a step back and acknowledge who is morally superior.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Yea yea whatever. The politicians are interchangeable and would sell you down the river for a roll of nickels.

MAGA are not conservatives. They are populists

Nobody said as such. And populism isn't a bad thing. Christian populism is on the rise, and has great prescriptions for society that leftist progressives have no answers for.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

So life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? You can forfeit your life or liberty for certain crimes. So says the Bible so they don't sound inalienable to me. There are plenty of things that might make you happy that you are forbidden.

Is free speech or the right to bear arms anywhere in the bible?

See, you're doing exactly what I said. You're trying to point the finger at a Christian and say where they are coming short in their standard.

But your standard is that you'd take rights away in a heart beat, and you know it. Our country still operates under a Christian ethical framework (portions of the population are moving away from it) in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

You don't get to point fingers when you have no ethical framework. If we acted like you, we'd imprison whoever we wanted, take whatever we wanted, etc. Even if I cede that Christianity is entire made-up, from what position do you have to oppose my side using it? To you it would be just another made-up basis for rights, on the same level as your made-up basis of rights.

You ought to be thankful and humble for us trying to maintain rights above man, because it protects everyone. We know where your ideology leads, open a history book. You see what happens when tyrants and governments decide to take rights. I can only take you to water, I can't make you drink.

 

[alang1216]

Exactly. So in your leftist/progressive society, slavery would be legal. And next door, in my Christian society, it would be illegal.

Now take a step back and acknowledge who is morally superior.

Your self-righteousness is unsupported by history. The USA was a Christian society AND a slave society.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Your self-righteousness is unsupported by history. The USA was a Christian society AND a slave society.

Key word; "Was"

It can take time for the truth to come out of the wash, moral institutions can get things wrong but then correct them.

You'd accept slavery today if 75% of your population desired it. You admitted as such. Thus, again, my society is higher in morality than yours.

 

[alang1216]

See, you're doing exactly what I said. You're trying to point the finger at a Christian and say where they are coming short in their standard.

We all come up short, Christians and non-Christians alike. You just refuse to admit it.

But your standard is that you'd take rights away in a heart beat, and you know it. Our country still operates under a Christian ethical framework (portions of the population are moving away from it) in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Au contraire. I share the ethics of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I don't have to be a Christian to do that.

You don't get to point fingers when you have no ethical framework. If we acted like you, we'd imprison whoever we wanted, take whatever we wanted, etc. Even if I cede that Christianity is entire made-up, from what position do you have to oppose my side using it? To you it would be just another made-up basis for rights, on the same level as your made-up basis of rights.

We do imprison whoever we want and take whatever we want, etc. You can get your ethics where ever you wish, as can I, the difference is that I don't claim to be morally superior.

You ought to be thankful and humble for us trying to maintain rights above man, because it protects everyone. We know where your ideology leads, open a history book. You see what happens when tyrants and governments decide to take rights. I can only take you to water, I can't make you drink.

Thanks but I don't want your Kool-Aid. Yes, tyrants limit rights, that is why I prefer democracies to monarchs, autocrats, and theocracies. If you prefer theocracy, try Iran.

 

[alang1216]

Key word; "Was"

It can take time for the truth to come out of the wash, moral institutions can get things wrong but then correct them.

You'd accept slavery today if 75% of your population desired it. You admitted as such. Thus, again, my society is higher in morality than yours.

Christians accepted slavery in the past, who's to say they won't in the future?

 

[Mr. Friscus]

We all come up short, Christians and non-Christians alike. You just refuse to admit it.

Yes, but you openly admit you'd still, today, allow slavery to be legal if 75% of your population desired it. You admit that you have no ethical framework, and thus no morality to stand on. You're held hostage by the mob.

Au contraire. I share the ethics of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I don't have to be a Christian to do that.

You benefit from its benevolence, but if leftist progressives wrote a constitution, it wouldn't be this one. You know this.

We do imprison whoever we want and take whatever we want, etc.

No we don't. Thankfully, the Constitution still has teeth.. because we saw the left try to imprison Trump multiple times with BS charges... and if leftist/progressives were truly in power, they'd just act like other leftist tyrants and throw political opposition in prison.

You can get your ethics where ever you wish, as can I

Yes, I have an ethical framework I can point to, one that this nation's founding was based on.

the difference is that I don't claim to be morally superior.

Because you can't. You'd allow anything if the mob said so.

Thanks but I don't want your Kool-Aid. Yes, tyrants limit rights, that is why I prefer democracies to monarchs, autocrats, and theocracies. If you prefer theocracy, try Iran.

I'm not advocating for a theocracy, although i could and you'd have no moral ground to object to it. It would just be my preferences vs. your preferences.

 

[Matted Joybeard]

Conservatives believe basic human rights (The bill of rights) are above man and are a manifestation of the will of a Creator or higher being (aka God), and thus can't be touched.

Now, as a Christian Conservative, I believe in rights for all people, but it's important to point out that it is the much higher road. My worldview would require me to give rights to people I oppose, when my opposition wouldn't think twice of taking away my rights if they had the power to do so.

Your description of conservatives, yourself as a 'Christian Conservative' paints you as full of shit. Supposedly believe that rights are God given, yet no they are something that you give. No - they are something you TAKE AWAY in this weird belief set. The examples abound of self-proclaimed christian witholding rights to those they fashion as an other or an enemy. They snatch away God's gift from those they oppose, cast a shadow where there should be light. A force of darkness is what you are if you were being honest about your supposed beliefs.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Your description of conservatives, yourself as a 'Christian Conservative' paints you as full of shit. Supposedly believe that rights are God given, yet no they are something that you give. No - they are something you TAKE AWAY in this weird belief set. The examples abound of self-proclaimed christian witholding rights to those they fashion as an other or an enemy. They snatch away God's gift from those they oppose, cast a shadow where there should be light. A force of darkness is what you are if you were being honest about your supposed beliefs.

You're doing exactly as I described happens, and I'm not giving a specific prescription, I've even said you shouldn't withhold rights, but just warned/described that we're the only ones who would sacrifice for the other side, and the other side's worldview can only exist right now because of the benevolence of Christianity. If they were to come into true power, it's easy to get a leftist/progressive to admit they'd take away any rights they deem fit.

But predictably, you're focusing only on me personally, holding me to my standard, and not acknowledging that when compared to the "other side" in our country, I (we) are the only ones with a moral framework. It needs to be acknowledged that the opposing side has none, because I think often times mainstream, apolitical folk who vote think progressivism has a Constitutional outlook baked in. It doesn't.

And thus, shouldn't they be a bit grateful and humble? And on what grounds could they really complain about anything a Christian wants to impose on the public? They'd do the same thing, right?

 

[candycorn]

Your description of conservatives, yourself as a 'Christian Conservative' paints you as full of shit. Supposedly believe that rights are God given, yet no they are something that you give. No - they are something you TAKE AWAY in this weird belief set. The examples abound of self-proclaimed christian witholding rights to those they fashion as an other or an enemy. They snatch away God's gift from those they oppose, cast a shadow where there should be light. A force of darkness is what you are if you were being honest about your supposed beliefs.

Yep, thats what he said... "I" (you).

 

[alang1216]

Yes, but you openly admit you'd still, today, allow slavery to be legal if 75% of your population desired it. You admit that you have no ethical framework, and thus no morality to stand on. You're held hostage by the mob.

Why is it that conservatives only like democracy when it goes their way?

You benefit from its benevolence, but if leftist progressives wrote a constitution, it wouldn't be this one. You know this.

The Constitution was originally written by a pretty liberal bunch so, no, I don't know this.

No we don't. Thankfully, the Constitution still has teeth.. because we saw the left try to imprison Trump multiple times with BS charges... and if leftist/progressives were truly in power, they'd just act like other leftist tyrants and throw political opposition in prison.

Such irony! How many times was Trump and his henchmen convicted in a court of law? How many times has Bondi's charges been dismissed and she embarrassed by a judge?

Yes, I have an ethical framework I can point to, one that this nation's founding was based on.

Slavery was one of the foundations as was oppression of women. Nice ethical framework.

Because you can't. You'd allow anything if the mob said so.

Again you hate democracy and consider yourself superior to others. I take it you 'allow' abortion since that is the law of much of the land.

I'm not advocating for a theocracy, although i could and you'd have no moral ground to object to it. It would just be my preferences vs. your preferences.

Religious people, like you, feel they answer to a higher power and their morality is absolute and not relative. That may be comforting but is not born out by history. The morality of Christians, for instance, has been changing constantly since its inception. Not unlike other religions I'm familiar with. Christians in the past have done things that Christians today would find immoral, e.g., slavery and anti-Semitism. Note, I don't think Christians are any worse than any other group, I just don't see them as superior either.

 

[Zincwarrior]

The OP itself shows I am right. If someone beside you can decide if you have rights, then you have no rights.

The only rights you have are the ones you take.

 

[martybegan]

The reality is that rights are granted to us by the laws of the government. In a democracy, our rights are what we grant ourselves. We may claim they come from a higher power but that is mostly untrue and completely irrelevant. Our Bill of Rights, no matter the source, is enshrined in the Constitution and has the force of law. Those are our rights, subject to interpretation of course. There is no us vs. them scenario.

Rights are not granted to us by Constitutional government, certain ones are protected by it.

Rights are inherent, the question is are they protected or do you have to fight for them, either legislatively or physically.

Remember even the Bill of Rights had to be passed legislatively via the Constitutional amendment process.

As an example, you may believe you have the Right to an Abortion, but it's meaningless in a governmental sense unless it's enshrined in the Constitution as one, either the federal Constitution or your State Constitution. If not, then you either fight for it legislatively or go to the mattresses for it.