What Constitutes a "Right?"

[rubberhead]

I thought the topic was what constitutes a right.

 

[Intense]

You're stalling aren't you. The water is 75 Degrees. Pick a Right's case what if, that would go before a court. Fill in the blanks. Who, What When, Where, Relevant Factors, Concerns. Allow for Questions.

 

[Intense]

You're stalling aren't you. The water is 75 Degrees. Pick a Right's case what if, that would go before a court. Fill in the blanks. Who, What When, Where, Relevant Factors, Concerns. Allow for Questions.

 

[Setarcos]

This is a philosophical discussion, so I don't think facts really do us very much good here anyway.

Therein lies the problem with you

 

[theHawk]

A "right" is something that you have naturally. You have a right to your life, your liberty, your property, and your personal pursuit of happiness. The word "right" is thrown around too loosely in politics. If you believe you have a right to something then look at the situation deeper. Does your supposed "right" require the government's force to back it up? Does your "right" require the government to take from one person through taxation to supply you with your "right?" If the answer is yes then your "right" is clearly not a right at all because it violates somebody else's right to their own property. You cannot have a right to something that violates somebody else's rights.

An excellent question.

A "right" is an immunity from prosecution.

The right to exercise free speach means that the government cannot prosecute you for speaking your mind.

These days the left likes to confuse the word with entitlement. Democrats and Obama like to say that people have a "right to health care" or a "right to affordable health care." As far as I know no one in this country has ever been prosecuted by the government for recieving or giving health care. What they are implying is that everyone is entitled to health care from the government. However, if that were the case, then why aren't they pushing for the government to provide firearms to every citizen since it is a "right"?


A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate. --Thomas Jefferson, Rights of British America, 1774

 

[Dr Grump]

There's nothing premaure about it...

As is always the case in such debates; the facts are in and your obtuse response to those facts doesn't change them.

Fact: Humanity did not create itself...
Fact: Something other than humanity created humanity.
Fact: That which created Humanity is referred to as God.
Fact: The creation endowed life to humanity;
Fact: With that life comes the rightful entitlement to pursue the fulfillment of that life;
Fact: that rightful entitlement comes with the sacred responsibility to not exercise the pursuit of one's own life; to the detriment of the means of another to pursue the fulfillment of their own life.
Fact: where one fails to recognize one's own Right and the sacred responsibility inherent in that Right; and exercises their Rights to the detriment of another's means to exercise their own Right; one forfeits their Right.

Nothing complicated about it... and refusing to accept it, doesn't change it.

No facts there, just a bunch of assumptions and claims. I can see your problem now.

ROFLMNAO... I just adore sweet irony...

Notice how she advanced a claimed assumption; as she implies that claimed assumptions are invalid argument...

LOL... ya can't make this crap up.

Now when ya add to that these idiots hold themselves up as intellectuals... it is absolutely HYSTERICAL! (In at least two contexts and on several levels...)

You cannot prove any of your claims. And they are definitely not facts.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

No facts there, just a bunch of assumptions and claims. I can see your problem now.

ROFLMNAO... I just adore sweet irony...

Notice how she advanced a claimed assumption; as she implies that claimed assumptions are invalid argument...

LOL... ya can't make this crap up.

Now when ya add to that these idiots hold themselves up as intellectuals... it is absolutely HYSTERICAL! (In at least two contexts and on several levels...)

You cannot prove any of your claims. And they are definitely not facts.

I've proved them repeatedly... thus their 'incontrovertible' trait.

Now, if you've some evidence that human's created themselves... I'm open to hearing what ya have. But knowing the subject as I do, I can tell you that there is absolutely no chance that such is the case.

If you've some evidence that any of my facts are in error... same, same...

What I hear you saying is that you 'feel' my facts are in error; you 'feel' this quite strongly, even... but you, like your comrades have absolutely NO MEANS to so much as challenge those facts; let alone discredit them; at least no more means than to trot out the time tested, well worn "NUH HUH!" contest...

It's page 106 sis... and to be honest, that dog's pretty well played out.

But... if you think you've got something worthy of consideration; I say:

BRING IT!​

 

[Setarcos]

Making statements does not make them facts

Calling for genocide does not demonstrate that you should be saying anything about human rights

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

A "right" is something that you have naturally. You have a right to your life, your liberty, your property, and your personal pursuit of happiness. The word "right" is thrown around too loosely in politics. If you believe you have a right to something then look at the situation deeper. Does your supposed "right" require the government's force to back it up? Does your "right" require the government to take from one person through taxation to supply you with your "right?" If the answer is yes then your "right" is clearly not a right at all because it violates somebody else's right to their own property. You cannot have a right to something that violates somebody else's rights.

An excellent question.

A "right" is an immunity from prosecution.

The right to exercise free speach means that the government cannot prosecute you for speaking your mind.

These days the left likes to confuse the word with entitlement. Democrats and Obama like to say that people have a "right to health care" or a "right to affordable health care." As far as I know no one in this country has ever been prosecuted by the government for recieving or giving health care. What they are implying is that everyone is entitled to health care from the government. However, if that were the case, then why aren't they pushing for the government to provide firearms to every citizen since it is a "right"?


A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate. --Thomas Jefferson, Rights of British America, 1774

Firearms are counterproductive to tyranny... Leftism is tyranny... so... well you see the problem.

 

[Setarcos]

Right-Wingers love tyranny

and genocide

 

[Dr Grump]

I've proved them repeatedly... and they are incontrovertible facts.

Now, if you've some evidence that human's created themselves... I'm open to hearing what ya have. But knowing the subject as I do, I can tell you that there is absolutely no chance that such is the case.

If you've some evidence that any of my facts are in error... same, same...

What I hear you saying is that you 'feel' my facts are in error; you 'feel' this quite strongly, even... but you, like your comrades have absolutely NO MEANS to so much as challenge those facts; let alone discredit them; at least no more means than to trot out the time tested, well worn "NUH HUH!" contest...

It's page 106 sis... and to be honest, that dog's pretty well played out.

But... if you think you've got something worthy of consideration; I say:
BRING IT!

You haven't proved a damn thing. You have an opinion. Fine, but don't tell me a god made humans. Using that logic, a god must have come from somewhere, who made the god? An uber god?

I don't have to proof errors in OPINIONS. You have given no facts to base your opinions on. If you don't know the difference between the two, you ain't worth talking to,

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Just a note to say how wonderful it is to see Seta... But not having to hear her.

Such is the natural order of children... and what a refreshing exercise of that order.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I've proved them repeatedly... and they are incontrovertible facts.

Now, if you've some evidence that human's created themselves... I'm open to hearing what ya have. But knowing the subject as I do, I can tell you that there is absolutely no chance that such is the case.

If you've some evidence that any of my facts are in error... same, same...

What I hear you saying is that you 'feel' my facts are in error; you 'feel' this quite strongly, even... but you, like your comrades have absolutely NO MEANS to so much as challenge those facts; let alone discredit them; at least no more means than to trot out the time tested, well worn "NUH HUH!" contest...

It's page 106 sis... and to be honest, that dog's pretty well played out.

But... if you think you've got something worthy of consideration; I say:

BRING IT!​

You haven't proved a damn thing.

Well, the facts are actually 'truths...' specifically, truths of the self evident variety... All I've done is noted those truths and demonstrated their validity through sound intellectual demonstration.

You have an opinion.

Yes... much as it is my opinion that it is mighty hot on the sun... my opinion is that this fact is self evident. That you disagree, is your right... but your disagreeing doesn't discredit the fact.

Repeating your disagreement doesn't underscore anything but your inability to challenge the facts/truths... VEHEMENTLY DISAGREEING with those facts doesn't challenge those truths inherent in those facts...

Fine, but don't tell me a god made humans.

God can mean anything to anyone... you may feel that God does not exist; that the concept of God is a myth... That 'belief' does not change the FACT/TRUTH: That Humans did not create themselves... and that whatever did create humans is God. You can claim that God did not create humans... but such a claim is absolutely baseless and amounts to nothing but an empty cliche...

Usig that logic, a god must have come from somewhere, who made the god? An uber god?

Does it? How does it do that? Explain it to me? God is an unknowable value... which created a knowable value... and you 'believe' that this calculation requires that the same rules which apply to the known value must also apply to the unknown value.

Seems a tad short sighted to me; given that you've no means to know what rules apply to the unknown value.

But again, I'm open to whatever you'd like to offer.

I don't have to proof errors in OPINIONS.

ROFL... yet you offer opinions as PROOF! Isn't that hilarious?

You have given no facts to base your opinions on.

No? So you feel that the fact: Humans did not create themselves needs some basis in proof? Ya see, that's sorta the thing about self evident truths... Ya see, they're truths which are improvable; but which are so firmly founded in immutable reason, that the truth is incontestable.

Ya know... it occurs to me that while this is fairly simple stuff... you being an imbecile may put ya a tad behind the power-curve... which is to say that you may never 'get it'...

Not to worry, as your opinions aren't exactly carrying a ton of influence... they're fairly pedestrian and as such commonly held... but idiots are a dime a dozen, so don't sweat it.

If you don't know the difference between the two, you ain't worth talking to,

WOW! Now there's some irony swimmin' around in there somewhere... Sadly, it's probably closer to that abyss of ignorance that you're so eager to demonstrate, so I'm forced to chuckle at your expense... AGAIN!

 

[Dr Grump]

Great, so now you're redefining what a god is...let me know when you've come up with a dictionary definition and we'll take it from there...sheesh.....

 

[Dr Grump]

[

ROFL... yet you offer opinions as PROOF! Isn't that hilarious?
!

Really? Have I? Where? Take your time....

 

[rubberhead]

God can mean anything to anyone... you may feel that God does not exist; that the concept of God is a myth... That 'belief' does not change the FACT/TRUTH: That Humans did not create themselves... and that whatever did create humans is God. You can claim that God did not create humans... but such a claim is absolutely baseless and amounts to nothing but an empty cliche...

This post completely changes my opinion of your opinions. I was thinking that you had something very specific in mind when you said God. Even though I say I'm agnostic, I do believe that life is unique as a phenomena because most of the universe abhors order. I mean, on a much larger scale the universe may appear ordered, but at our scale it appears to abhor order. It makes sense that life would spring up in a pocket of order like the Earth (or certain regions of Her), but it is highly unlikely that such a pocket of order would exist in the first place. I guess it seems obvious that no matter how unlikely something is, if it is possible then it will occur in an infinite space. So I guess my God is infinity. Infinity is another one of those things that we cannot really show exists because to do so would show that what we've shown is in fact, not infinity. Before the semantics police attack, we can show in the abstract that something is infinite, but we cannot count to infinity.

 

[The T]

Great, so now you're redefining what a god is...let me know when you've come up with a dictionary definition and we'll take it from there...sheesh.....

*WHO* is Redefining WHO *GOD* is?

God is NOT a "what".

 

[Dr Grump]

Great, so now you're redefining what a god is...let me know when you've come up with a dictionary definition and we'll take it from there...sheesh.....

*WHO* is Redefining WHO *GOD* is?

God is NOT a "what".

According to Pubic a god can be anything that you want it to be, so according to him, it can indeed be a what....

 

[The T]

Great, so now you're redefining what a god is...let me know when you've come up with a dictionary definition and we'll take it from there...sheesh.....

*WHO* is Redefining WHO *GOD* is?

God is NOT a "what".

According to Pubic a god can be anything that you want it to be, so according to him, it can indeed be a what....

Disagree. GOD is a WHO.

Enough said.

 

[rubberhead]

Great, so now you're redefining what a god is...let me know when you've come up with a dictionary definition and we'll take it from there...sheesh.....

*WHO* is Redefining WHO *GOD* is?

God is NOT a "what".

Why not?