Do our rights come from nature and God as Paul Ryan says?

[JakeStarkey]

Women are not cattle needing fences, and you, scotsman, are well named.

Paul Ryan keeps saying our rights come from nature and God not the government. Actually, they come from "we the people" and we decide the rights that government puts foward through our representatives, referendums and so forth. Nature dictates some of our limitiations only. But we have been able to overcome a lot of those. God? If you believe in him, I thought he gave us free will to decide things for ourselves?

Actually, the Bill of Rights are more like "Fence Laws". They are there to keep government from infringing on everyone's rights by God or Nature.

For instance, a church may have a rule where all women need to dress from head to toe with every patch of skin covered except for the hands and face. This is a rule, or law, a "Fence Law", to keep men from committing adultery in their hearts.

 

[B. Kidd]

That's your opinion and non-binding on anyone.

Declaration of Independence is not law, merely a statement of why we left Great Britain.

Our Constitution is a secular document, which in no way states our rights are God given.

The significance of 'Declarations' is that they provide a direction and/or vision on which 'Constitutions' are founded.

After the French Revolution, the "Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen" espoused 'natural law' without basing itself on religious authority, unlike our declaration.. But, yet, their ensuing constitution was guided by their declaration.
So it is an opinion set in the historical precedent of two seperate revolutions, declarations, and constitutions.
Fact.

 

[courseofhistory]

Bingo..... (Independent my ass, CofHist. has gotz to be a Liberal).

I love the way people jump to conclusions based on one thought a person puts forward. Unlike dogmantic libs and repubs, I'm generally in the middle agreeing with some cons. policies and some liberal.

Example:

I'm against the continued futile wars we are involved in now but I am a hawk on some other issues regarding foreign policy (if the war is necessary and justified due to our national defense)

I'm against illegal immigration and think we should build a wall, deport millions, etc. yet give citizenship to children brought here by their parents (between the ages of 0 and 20) through a predetermined date in perhaps 2013. The rest have to go and apply for legal citizenship.

I am pro women't rights but personally would advise against abortion (but would not want it made illegal)

I am for welfare to work for those who can work but I think we go about it wrong and people need more training on how to be self-sufficient

I'm for most social programs such as disablility for those who are truly disabled, social security (I don't object to changes if they are done gradually for future generations only), etc.

I am for getting rid of many departments in the US government but some that Romney wants to eliminate or reduce I disagree with

I think people should take personal responsiblity but I also think many need to be taught these skills since they weren't brought up with them so they can be self sufficient and not dependent on government

There is a lot more on both sides but this is a small example. So quit labeling me as something I'm not!

Whether I labeled you right or wrong, either way 'The Declaration of Independence' gave me that right.
Now, go read it!

The Constitution gave you the right to be wrong and express it! I'm now retired but I used to teach constitutional law, thanks! I lean towards being a strict constitutionalist.

 

[B. Kidd]

I love the way people jump to conclusions based on one thought a person puts forward. Unlike dogmantic libs and repubs, I'm generally in the middle agreeing with some cons. policies and some liberal.

Example:

I'm against the continued futile wars we are involved in now but I am a hawk on some other issues regarding foreign policy (if the war is necessary and justified due to our national defense)

I'm against illegal immigration and think we should build a wall, deport millions, etc. yet give citizenship to children brought here by their parents (between the ages of 0 and 20) through a predetermined date in perhaps 2013. The rest have to go and apply for legal citizenship.

I am pro women't rights but personally would advise against abortion (but would not want it made illegal)

I am for welfare to work for those who can work but I think we go about it wrong and people need more training on how to be self-sufficient

I'm for most social programs such as disablility for those who are truly disabled, social security (I don't object to changes if they are done gradually for future generations only), etc.

I am for getting rid of many departments in the US government but some that Romney wants to eliminate or reduce I disagree with

I think people should take personal responsiblity but I also think many need to be taught these skills since they weren't brought up with them so they can be self sufficient and not dependent on government

There is a lot more on both sides but this is a small example. So quit labeling me as something I'm not!

Whether I labeled you right or wrong, either way 'The Declaration of Independence' gave me that right.
Now, go read it!

It gave you the right to be wrong and express it! I'm now retired but I used to teach constitutional law, thanks!

You and Obama have something in common, thanks.

 

[NYcarbineer]

That is simply not true. Rights may be restricted through the legislative process, but the rights we're talking about, you're born with. We can debate on what is and what isn't an inherent right, but you are very wrong that rights come through democracy or through social consensus. Just flat out wrong.

I am amazed that there is this much ignorance on this subject. It is the very founding principal that differentiated the USA from all previous societies.

Ah the wonders of public education...

Then why can the right of gays to same sex marriage be so easily ignored, and denied?

Rights are (1) to Life (2) Liberty (3) Property (4) Pursue Happiness.

/.

Says who? God?

What does that even mean in response to my question?

 

[Contumacious]

Then why can the right of gays to same sex marriage be so easily ignored, and denied?

Rights are (1) to Life (2) Liberty (3) Property (4) Pursue Happiness.

/.

Says who? God?

What does that even mean in response to my question?

Your right to get butt-fucked is included in the right to pursue happiness.

What else can I clarify for ya'?

.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If we are born with our God-given rights, but they can be taken away by due process, as one poster said,

then our rights only exist, as real, exercisable possessions, at the pleasure of whatever group of people are in charge of deciding what is due process.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Rights are (1) to Life (2) Liberty (3) Property (4) Pursue Happiness.

/.

Says who? God?

What does that even mean in response to my question?

Your right to get butt-fucked is included in the right to pursue happiness.

What else can I clarify for ya'?

.

Are human sexual rights inalienable? Are they God given, or natural?

 

[yidnar]

Paul Ryan keeps saying our rights come from nature and God not the government. Actually, they come from "we the people" and we decide the rights that government puts foward through our representatives, referendums and so forth. Nature dictates some of our limitiations only. But we have been able to overcome a lot of those. God? If you believe in him, I thought he gave us free will to decide things for ourselves?

thats what Ryan means libbtard !!god gave us the free will to live our lives as we wish as long as we do not trample on the rights of others !! gov has always Been a hinderance to free will !! and big gov has a history of being oppressive and evil !! so you and your cowardly weak ilk can sell your freedoms for Da gubament benefits you demand ,i'll keep my freedom commy !!

 

[Contumacious]

Says who? God?

What does that even mean in response to my question?

Your right to get butt-fucked is included in the right to pursue happiness.

What else can I clarify for ya'?

.

Are human sexual rights inalienable? Are they God given, or natural?

Asked and answered.

Move on.

.

 

[Amazed]

Can anyone tell me why all of that Student Loan bullshit was buried in the Health Care Bill?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Can anyone tell me why nutters have such an intense lack of confidence in the American experiment? Why they feel that the destruction of our legal system and utter loss of our freedom is imminent?

The fact is that our way of doing things is very stable.........and is not being challenged in any way. There is an election coming up, nutters. A free election. Celebrate America.

 

[Amazed]

LOL.....very stable....says the taker with zero understanding of how things actually work....

You think we can "print" our way out of this.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Paul Ryan has no effing clue. Neither does idiot Mittens. How dare they make their grand entrance from a BATTLESHIP and to the music from the movie, Air Force One. Mittens is a draft dodger who hid out in Paris, in the lap of luxury. Ryan is a hawk who cheerfully sends others to a useless and illegal war but never served himself. A pair of chickenhawks with not one real testicle between them but they're hoping that rw's are so dumb, they'll ignore that or believe that somehow, either of them have ever done a damn thing to save American rights.

Our RIGHTS come from the men and women who lay down their lives while others snap their fingers for another mint julep.

Where was "gawd" or nature on the battlefields of the American Revolution? Or, the battlefields of any other war the US has fought in?

Saying that his god or nature gave us our right to free speech, our right to "bear arms", or any other RIGHT we enjoy, just proves what a weasel Ryan really is. He didn't fight for anything and Mittens sure as hell didn't fight for anything so neither of these jerks have the right to tell anybody where their rights came from.

What a matched set they are.

 

[B. Kidd]

Paul Ryan has no effing clue. Neither does idiot Mittens. How dare they make their grand entrance from a BATTLESHIP and to the music from the movie, Air Force One. Mittens is a draft dodger who hid out in Paris, in the lap of luxury. Ryan is a hawk who cheerfully sends others to a useless and illegal war but never served himself. A pair of chickenhawks with not one real testicle between them but they're hoping that rw's are so dumb, they'll ignore that or believe that somehow, either of them have ever done a damn thing to save American rights.

Our RIGHTS come from the men and women who lay down their lives while others snap their fingers for another mint julep.

Where was "gawd" or nature on the battlefields of the American Revolution? Or, the battlefields of any other war the US has fought in?

Saying that his god or nature gave us our right to free speech, our right to "bear arms", or any other RIGHT we enjoy, just proves what a weasel Ryan really is. He didn't fight for anything and Mittens sure as hell didn't fight for anything so neither of these jerks have the right to tell anybody where their rights came from.

What a matched set they are.

You, sir, are a shining example why 'truths' sometimes are NOT self-evident and we need some matters left up to 'Providence'.................

 

[Amazed]

Paul Ryan has no effing clue. Neither does idiot Mittens. How dare they make their grand entrance from a BATTLESHIP and to the music from the movie, Air Force One. Mittens is a draft dodger who hid out in Paris, in the lap of luxury. Ryan is a hawk who cheerfully sends others to a useless and illegal war but never served himself. A pair of chickenhawks with not one real testicle between them but they're hoping that rw's are so dumb, they'll ignore that or believe that somehow, either of them have ever done a damn thing to save American rights.

Our RIGHTS come from the men and women who lay down their lives while others snap their fingers for another mint julep.

Where was "gawd" or nature on the battlefields of the American Revolution? Or, the battlefields of any other war the US has fought in?

Saying that his god or nature gave us our right to free speech, our right to "bear arms", or any other RIGHT we enjoy, just proves what a weasel Ryan really is. He didn't fight for anything and Mittens sure as hell didn't fight for anything so neither of these jerks have the right to tell anybody where their rights came from.

What a matched set they are.

Then just thank me for your rights and move on, you are trying my patience and I just might take them back from you.

You disgust people like Obama and you are too stupid to know it.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

NYcarbineer

Are human sexual rights inalienable? Are they God given, or natural?

I don't believe in Magic Sky Fairies so that's not even part of the equation. Those who do believe in a "god" would have no choice to believe that sexual rights are bestowed by their god. In that case, homosexuality would also be given by their god so they would protect what their god created.

In real life however, hypocrites are against anything and everything that doesn't fit their narrow little hate beliefs. And, by GAWD, if there is one thing "christians" love its HATE.

Sexual rights are part of being human. But, for all the haters, certain sexual rights are terrifying. Way too many are scared to death that they might be homa-sax-shuls so they hate them.

 

[LoneLaugher]

LOL.....very stable....says the taker with zero understanding of how things actually work....

You think we can "print" our way out of this.

Hi.

What do you mean by "taker"?

 

[B. Kidd]

NYcarbineer

Are human sexual rights inalienable? Are they God given, or natural?

I don't believe in Magic Sky Fairies so that's not even part of the equation. Those who do believe in a "god" would have no choice to believe that sexual rights are bestowed by their god. In that case, homosexuality would also be given by their god so they would protect what their god created.

In real life however, hypocrites are against anything and everything that doesn't fit their narrow little hate beliefs. And, by GAWD, if there is one thing "christians" love its HATE.

Sexual rights are part of being human. But, for all the haters, certain sexual rights are terrifying. Way too many are scared to death that they might be homa-sax-shuls so they hate them.

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENTH
CHRISTIANS LOVE HATE

Of the above four sayings, which three did George Orwell write, and which one did Luddly Goodnite write?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Narratively correct, legally nonsense.

We are a secular government that keeps government and organized religion apart.

End of story.

That's your opinion and non-binding on anyone.

The significance of 'Declarations' is that they provide a direction and/or vision on which 'Constitutions' are founded.

After the French Revolution, the "Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen" espoused 'natural law' without basing itself on religious authority, unlike our declaration.. But, yet, their ensuing constitution was guided by their declaration.
So it is an opinion set in the historical precedent of two seperate revolutions, declarations, and constitutions.
Fact.