CNN Anchor: ‘Our Rights Do Not Come From God’

[Skylar]

. I'm asking what the BASIS of rights is.

Aristotle's scientific observations of life on the planet

So is it nature that is basis of our rights? Or Aristotle's observations on nature that is the basis of our rights?

as I said Aristotle was the first major contributor to our concept of natural rights.

And I'm asking you if its Aristotle himself that is the basis of our rights. Or if it is nature itself that is the basis of our rights?

You've spoken of Aristotle as the 'smartest man that ever lived'. So is it his judgment that is the basis of our rights. Or did he discover something about nature that already existed? Newton for example didn't invent gravity. He discovered it. So newton wouldn't be the basis of gravity. Mass would.

Similarly, what is the basis of your conception of rights? Aristotle's judgment and skill in observation? Or nature itself?

 

[ogibillm]

Make your argument that our rights are based in anything other than our agreement. ?

our agreement??. We didn't right the Declaration!! Aristotle Cicero Jesus Locke Jefferson Burke and Friedman did. We merely agree to their ingenious findings but would never discover them ourselves.

Says who? Again, you didn't actually answer my question. You simply offered us another Appeal to Authority fallacy.

But you never logically or rationally established that our rights are based on anything other than our agreement.

Jefferson for example believed in slavery. Would being able to hold slaves be part of your 'natural rights'? if not, why not? Remember, if rights are objective and intrinsic.....they can't change based on circumstance or source.

But if rights are circumstantial and our invention, then they must change based on circumstance or source.

And sweetie pie, the conception of rights changes as we do.

Thomas Jefferson was a consistent opponent of slavery his whole life

except while banging his slaves.

 

[Skylar]

As demonstrated so elegantly by all his slaves.

who could not be freed legally

Says who? Jefferson chose to build on his estate. He chose to live a lavish lifestyle. THAT is why he had debts.

He used his slaves as collateral for debts to fuel the expansion of his mansion and to keep himself living the life of luxury. And this is 'opposition to slavery'?

If it is, it raises hypocrisy to an art form.

it was illegal to have freed slaves running around Virginia

Then how did Jefferson free 5 slaves in his will?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If it is, it raises hypocrisy to an art form.

dear, it does't matter whether he was a hypocrite but rather whether his first draft of the Declaration said more about slavery than taxes and whether he fired a shot heard around the world that ultimately freed billions of human beings from liberal bondage.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Make your argument that our rights are based in anything other than our agreement. ?

our agreement??. We didn't right the Declaration!! Aristotle Cicero Jesus Locke Jefferson Burke and Friedman did. We merely agree to their ingenious findings but would never discover them ourselves.

Says who? Again, you didn't actually answer my question. You simply offered us another Appeal to Authority fallacy.

But you never logically or rationally established that our rights are based on anything other than our agreement.

Jefferson for example believed in slavery. Would being able to hold slaves be part of your 'natural rights'? if not, why not? Remember, if rights are objective and intrinsic.....they can't change based on circumstance or source.

But if rights are circumstantial and our invention, then they must change based on circumstance or source.

And sweetie pie, the conception of rights changes as we do.

Thomas Jefferson was a consistent opponent of slavery his whole life

As demonstrated so elegantly by all his slaves.

i understand that history is beyond your scope

Jefferson in justifying the Revolution attacked the british sponsoring of the slave trade to the colonies

one of the first jurisdictions in the whole world to ban the slave trade happened in Virginia thanks to Jefferson

as President he led efforts to criminalize the international slave trade

there is more lots more but i feel posting it would be lost on a dimwit like you

 

[Skylar]

If it is, it raises hypocrisy to an art form.

dear, it does't matter whether he was a hypocrite but rather whether his first draft of the Declaration said more about slavery than taxes and whether he fired a shot heard around the world that ultimately freed billions of human beings from liberal bondage.

Ah, but sweetie pie.....to babble about 'rights to freedom to all men', while holding hundreds in bondage is ridiculously hypocritical. As it demonstrates that Jefferson didn't actually believe the ideals he gave lip service to.

He put his own lavish lifestyle, his own prestige, expanding his own mansion above one of the most egregious violations of his so called 'beliefs' that our nation has ever known: slaves. That's not a man who 'couldn't'. That's a man who wouldn't.

Also known as a hypocrite. Notice you don't actually disagree with me on that point, huh.

Remember that.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Or if it is nature itself that is the basis of our rights?

too stupid I've said several times that Aristotle's scientific observations of behavior became the primary basis of our founding documents

 

[Skylar]

Oh, and since we're delving into Aristotle....do you believe in his conception of a 'natural aristocracy'. One deemed worthy by natural law?

Aristotle believed in kingship. Is there a 'natural right' to be king?

Aristotle believed in Timocracy, where only property owners could vote. Is that too a 'natural right'?

 

[Skylar]

Or if it is nature itself that is the basis of our rights?

too stupid I've said several times that Aristotle's scientific observations of behavior became the primary basis of our founding documents

So its Aristotle's observations that are the basis of rights. Not nature itself. Gotcha. Then feel free to answer the following questions:

Do you believe in his conception of a 'natural aristocracy'. One deemed worthy by natural law?

Aristotle believed in kingship. Is there a 'natural right' to be king?

Aristotle believed in Timocracy, where only property owners could vote. Is that too a 'natural right'?

Aristotle believed in natural slavery, that some people are slaves by nature. Is this too a valid basis of 'natural rights'?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Ah, but sweetie pie.....to babble about 'rights to freedom to all men', while holding hundreds in bondage is ridiculously hypocritical. As it demonstrates that Jefferson didn't actually believe the ideals he gave lip service to.

you're like an idiot child pretending you would have behaved better had you been born owning slaves as our Founders were and when it had been natural all over the planet for 1000's of years.

 

[Skylar]

".....those who are as different [from other men] as the soul from the body or man from beast—and they are in this state if their work is the use of the body, and if this is the best that can come from them—are slaves by nature. For them it is better to be ruled in accordance with this sort of rule, if such is the case for the other things mentioned"

Politics by Aristotle.

So who are these 'natural slaves' in today's society?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So its Aristotle's observations that are the basis of rights. Not nature itself. Gotcha.

gotcha???? please show exactly where or admit as a typical liberal to lacking the IQ to defend what you say.

 

[Skylar]

Ah, but sweetie pie.....to babble about 'rights to freedom to all men', while holding hundreds in bondage is ridiculously hypocritical. As it demonstrates that Jefferson didn't actually believe the ideals he gave lip service to.

you're like an idiot child pretending you would have behaved better had you been born owning slaves as our Founders were and when it had been natural all over the planet for 1000's of years.

Hun, I'm the person telling you what a fucking hypocrite Jefferson was. How he gave empty lip service to the idea of the 'freedom for all men'. But kept slaves and mortgaged them to fund his lavish lifestyle.

Jefferson wasn't forced to expand his mansion. He CHOSE to. Jefferson wasn't forced to live a lavish lifestyle. He CHOSE to. And it was his construction projects and life of luxury that created the debts he used slaves to pay.

Jefferson didn't actually believe in ideals he espoused. He believed in his own comfort and his own wealth far more than he did his conception of 'freedom'.

Did you follow that time, puddin'? Or do you need me to lay it out for you again?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So who are these 'natural slaves' in today's society?

too stupid why would you expect to find them in todays society??

 

[Skylar]

So its Aristotle's observations that are the basis of rights. Not nature itself. Gotcha.

gotcha???? please show exactly where or admit as a typical liberal to lacking the IQ to defend what you say.

Um, dear? You clearly aren't following the conversation. I've shown you exactly where in the post you're replying to. And you ran like scared little bitch. Screw your courage to the sticking place and address the product of Aristotle's 'observations':

Do you believe in his conception of a 'natural aristocracy'. One deemed worthy by natural law?

Aristotle believed in kingship. Is there a 'natural right' to be king?

Aristotle believed in Timocracy, where only property owners could vote. Is that too a 'natural right'?

Aristotle believed in natural slavery, that some people are slaves by nature. Is this too a valid basis of 'natural rights'?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Hun, I'm the person telling you what a fucking hypocrite Jefferson was.

dear, whether Jefferson was a hypocrite or not is not our subject is it?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Do you believe in his conception of a 'natural aristocracy'. One deemed worthy by natural law?

too stupid!! no I don't!!!! so now are you going to tell us where the gotcha is or are you going to admit as a typical liberal you lack the IQ for this subject???????

 

[Skylar]

So who are these 'natural slaves' in today's society?

too stupid why would you expect to find them in todays society??

Isn't Aristotles observations are the basis of our rights, as you claimed? Did Aristotle's observations change? Or did our conception of rights change?

Because Politics by Aristotle hasn't changed in thousands of years. So we're all that's left. And our conception of rights have RADICALLY changed. We don't believe in 'natural slavery'. Or 'natural kingship'. Or 'natural timocracy'. Or 'natural aristocracy'.

All three pillars of governance by Aristotle's observations are rejected as laughably invalid. And since its Aristotle's observations that are the basis of our rights, either he's wrong.....or we are.

Pick which, hunny.

 

[Skylar]

Do you believe in his conception of a 'natural aristocracy'. One deemed worthy by natural law?

too stupid!! no I don't!!!! so now are you going to tell us where the gotcha is or are you going to admit as a typical liberal you lack the IQ for this subject???????

Well sweetie....you're just wiping your ass with Aristotle's observations now aren't you? Can any of us similarly discard any of Aristotle's idiocy....or are you the only one that has that priveledge?

And if WE decide what our rights are, and not Aristotle's observations, well hunny........you just made my argument for me.

 

[Skylar]

Hun, I'm the person telling you what a fucking hypocrite Jefferson was.

dear, whether Jefferson was a hypocrite or not is not our subject is it?

It is if his beliefs are the basis of our rights. And he didn't believe in what he said.