God given rights?

[Intense]

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

Blaming God, for what Man does with the Free Will that God gave Man, accomplishes what? Does Man Legislate Cause and Effect? Consequence? Providence? Maybe, to some minute ex-tense, yet pathetic in comparison. The best we do is Recognize a Truth greater than our selves, and fight to uphold, defend, and preserve it.

 

[PratchettFan]

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

No, it did not come from government. Government comes from man. Laws come from man. Rights come from man. "Inalienable rights" is a phrase which has meaning only so long as man says it has meaning. You can toss in God if that makes you feel better, but that changes nothing.

But I did not toss in God... you want me to, in order to make your anti-religion argument for you....

We are indeed created to live and act on our own.. and that creation did not come from government...

Why is it if I don't accept your religion I am somehow anti-religion? You are saying these are rights given by God and I am saying they are not. That means I am attacking you but you are not attacking me? Seems a tad one sided.

As I said. It does not come from government. It comes from us. It all comes from us.

 

[Artevelde]

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

Have you actually read the Declaration of Independence. It talks quite explicitely about God and the Creator and the rights with which He has endowed man.

 

[Intense]

No, it did not come from government. Government comes from man. Laws come from man. Rights come from man. "Inalienable rights" is a phrase which has meaning only so long as man says it has meaning. You can toss in God if that makes you feel better, but that changes nothing.

But I did not toss in God... you want me to, in order to make your anti-religion argument for you....

We are indeed created to live and act on our own.. and that creation did not come from government...

Why is it if I don't accept your religion I am somehow anti-religion? You are saying these are rights given by God and I am saying they are not. That means I am attacking you but you are not attacking me? Seems a tad one sided.

As I said. It does not come from government. It comes from us. It all comes from us.

I have no problem with you not accepting my Religion. What you believe or don't believe, is your business, it's between you and God. Ignore away.

 

[DiamondDave]

But I did not toss in God... you want me to, in order to make your anti-religion argument for you....

We are indeed created to live and act on our own.. and that creation did not come from government...

Why is it if I don't accept your religion I am somehow anti-religion? You are saying these are rights given by God and I am saying they are not. That means I am attacking you but you are not attacking me? Seems a tad one sided.

As I said. It does not come from government. It comes from us. It all comes from us.

I have no problem with you not accepting my Religion. What you believe or don't believe, is your business, it's between you and God. Ignore away.

Well.. and the fact that I never said given by God... but he's trying at least... I tried to explain the reasoning behind it

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

 

[DiamondDave]

Take a look at any herd or pack animal. When threatened, the herd will form a circle with the males to the outside and the females and calves in the center. This isn't planned, it is in the genes.

All human beings are social animals. We work together in cooperation. Otherwise, we die. We do not hatch from an egg on our own, like an alligator. We require years of rearing. Gravid females require assistance and protection. We learn through being taught by the clan, knowledge being passed down. A human child on its own almost certainly dies.

In every human society above the level of small clan you will find two organizations. Government and religion. No exceptions to this. They vary in nature, but they are always there. They are survival mechanisms to allow human beings to operate in complex social structures. Without that structure, the individual human is helpless. But that structure requires rules or we tend to start killing each other. Thus government and religion.

So you are part of the social compact whether you wish it or not. You have no choice in the matter because otherwise you die. Without the society, you never learn how not to die. You are not born with the capacity to survive outside of the society. It is in your genes.

Otherwise known as you have nothing to back up your statement.. there is no social compact in our genes...

If that makes you feel better.

Knowing that you spout off shit statements without really backing it up with fact... yeah, makes me feel better that you are indeed shown to be ranting and nothing more..

There is no genetic code for a social compact.... P-E-R-I-O-D

 

[copsnrobbers]

God given rights?

are being taken away.. a little at a time, Just like everything else the liberals do until now. Obby's in over drive. It's gonna cost them.. if the liberals don't cheat at the polls.

 

[PratchettFan]

Why is it if I don't accept your religion I am somehow anti-religion? You are saying these are rights given by God and I am saying they are not. That means I am attacking you but you are not attacking me? Seems a tad one sided.

As I said. It does not come from government. It comes from us. It all comes from us.

I have no problem with you not accepting my Religion. What you believe or don't believe, is your business, it's between you and God. Ignore away.

Well.. and the fact that I never said given by God... but he's trying at least... I tried to explain the reasoning behind it

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

You said "anti-religion". I think the assumption your are referring to God is a fair one.

I believe it was you who said "should" is not a right. I pointed out there are lots of "shoulds". The reality, whether you like that reality or not, is that whether you say a right comes from man, from God, from a higher power, or whatever makes not one bit of difference. There is no right which cannot be taken from you. You retain that right only so long as the society in which you live allows you to retain that right. If you are arrested by the police, put up against a wall and summarily executed, you can say the right to life comes from God but you are still dead. So, for all practical purposes, it doesn't matter where it comes from. The only thing that matters is how it is kept and that is only done by us.

 

[SniperFire]

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

No, it did not come from government. Government comes from man. Laws come from man. Rights come from man. "Inalienable rights" is a phrase which has meaning only so long as man says it has meaning. You can toss in God if that makes you feel better, but that changes nothing.

That is not how the USA was founded. See: Declaration of Independence.

You can toss God out of it if it makes you feel better, but it does not change the fact that the USA was founded as somewhat of a theocracy.

 

[PratchettFan]

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

No, it did not come from government. Government comes from man. Laws come from man. Rights come from man. "Inalienable rights" is a phrase which has meaning only so long as man says it has meaning. You can toss in God if that makes you feel better, but that changes nothing.

That is not how the USA was founded. See: Declaration of Independence.

You can toss God out of it if it makes you feel better, but it does not change the fact that the USA was founded as somewhat of a theocracy.

No. It wasn't. And whether or not the FFs thought those rights came from some higher being does not suddenly create a higher being.

 

[DiamondDave]

I have no problem with you not accepting my Religion. What you believe or don't believe, is your business, it's between you and God. Ignore away.

Well.. and the fact that I never said given by God... but he's trying at least... I tried to explain the reasoning behind it

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

You said "anti-religion". I think the assumption your are referring to God is a fair one.

I believe it was you who said "should" is not a right. I pointed out there are lots of "shoulds". The reality, whether you like that reality or not, is that whether you say a right comes from man, from God, from a higher power, or whatever makes not one bit of difference. There is no right which cannot be taken from you. You retain that right only so long as the society in which you live allows you to retain that right. If you are arrested by the police, put up against a wall and summarily executed, you can say the right to life comes from God but you are still dead. So, for all practical purposes, it doesn't matter where it comes from. The only thing that matters is how it is kept and that is only done by us.

EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT I NEVER MENTIONED GOD..... I was talking about the reasoning behind having the inalienable right attributed to a higher power or authority and not to man or the creations of man.... and the reason is EXACTLY what I said it was... you just can't take your little atheist head around the 'God' argument....

And it is not 'how it is kept' as in what government or society does... it is how we are in dealing with ourselves... you state that government can take away my right to, let's say the pursuit of happiness... I say that they can try, but because my right to life or the pursuit of happiness comes from something other than the creation of man, I can fight and even die for it because it still exists even if government would say it does not.... that is why stating it like it is stated in the founding documents is so goddamn important... it does not make the government the end all be all, the grand exalted poobah, or that which is the holder of the proverbial excaliber... it shows that the making of man (the government) can only go so far and that it can be taken down before that right can

 

[DiamondDave]

No, it did not come from government. Government comes from man. Laws come from man. Rights come from man. "Inalienable rights" is a phrase which has meaning only so long as man says it has meaning. You can toss in God if that makes you feel better, but that changes nothing.

That is not how the USA was founded. See: Declaration of Independence.

You can toss God out of it if it makes you feel better, but it does not change the fact that the USA was founded as somewhat of a theocracy.

No. It wasn't. And whether or not the FFs thought those rights came from some higher being does not suddenly create a higher being.

And there is where all your anger stems from... someone saying that there is a higher being than you... something more than man...

 

[The T]

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

No, it did not come from government. Government comes from man. Laws come from man. Rights come from man. "Inalienable rights" is a phrase which has meaning only so long as man says it has meaning. You can toss in God if that makes you feel better, but that changes nothing.

That is not how the USA was founded. See: Declaration of Independence.

You can toss God out of it if it makes you feel better, but it does not change the fact that the USA was founded as somewhat of a theocracy.

It was...and then it wasn't. See the First Amendment. However...the First Amendment was born on the religious precept of liberty to choose to worship in your own way, or not...and Government was to stay out of it.

 

[SniperFire]

No, it did not come from government. Government comes from man. Laws come from man. Rights come from man. "Inalienable rights" is a phrase which has meaning only so long as man says it has meaning. You can toss in God if that makes you feel better, but that changes nothing.

That is not how the USA was founded. See: Declaration of Independence.

You can toss God out of it if it makes you feel better, but it does not change the fact that the USA was founded as somewhat of a theocracy.

It was...and then it wasn't. See the First Amendment. However...the First Amendment was born on the religious precept of liberty to choose to worship in your own way, or not...and Government was to stay out of it.

.. as long as nobody stepped on the God-given inalienable rights.

At our core, we are a theocracy.

 

[PratchettFan]

Well.. and the fact that I never said given by God... but he's trying at least... I tried to explain the reasoning behind it

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

You said "anti-religion". I think the assumption your are referring to God is a fair one.

I believe it was you who said "should" is not a right. I pointed out there are lots of "shoulds". The reality, whether you like that reality or not, is that whether you say a right comes from man, from God, from a higher power, or whatever makes not one bit of difference. There is no right which cannot be taken from you. You retain that right only so long as the society in which you live allows you to retain that right. If you are arrested by the police, put up against a wall and summarily executed, you can say the right to life comes from God but you are still dead. So, for all practical purposes, it doesn't matter where it comes from. The only thing that matters is how it is kept and that is only done by us.

EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT I NEVER MENTIONED GOD..... I was talking about the reasoning behind having the inalienable right attributed to a higher power or authority and not to man or the creations of man.... and the reason is EXACTLY what I said it was... you just can't take your little atheist head around the 'God' argument....

And it is not 'how it is kept' as in what government or society does... it is how we are in dealing with ourselves... you state that government can take away my right to, let's say the pursuit of happiness... I say that they can try, but because my right to life or the pursuit of happiness comes from something other than the creation of man, I can fight and even die for it because it still exists even if government would say it does not.... that is why stating it like it is stated in the founding documents is so goddamn important... it does not make the government the end all be all, the grand exalted poobah, or that which is the holder of the proverbial excaliber... it shows that the making of man (the government) can only go so far and that it can be taken down before that right can

You keep talking about the government and I keep talking about society. The government is only one aspect of society. When a lynch mob hangs a man, that is not the government - but the man is still dead. That is the work of your neighbors.

You say it is important to put this in the hands of a higher power to make it more powerful than the government. I argue that doing so simply transfers the power from one oppressor to another. These are our rights. We fought for them, we died for them. They belong to us. Not because some higher power gave them to us but because we took them. And we are not going to give them back. They are ours because we say they are ours and we require no greater authority than ourselves. Our leaders govern under our sufferance and our sufferance alone. The power they yield is not the power of some higher authority, it is ours and ours alone.

That's how you keep your rights.

 

[PratchettFan]

That is not how the USA was founded. See: Declaration of Independence.

You can toss God out of it if it makes you feel better, but it does not change the fact that the USA was founded as somewhat of a theocracy.

No. It wasn't. And whether or not the FFs thought those rights came from some higher being does not suddenly create a higher being.

And there is where all your anger stems from... someone saying that there is a higher being than you... something more than man...

It does not anger me if you think there is a higher being. I have no idea if there is one, I just consider it irrelevant.

 

[DiamondDave]

No. It wasn't. And whether or not the FFs thought those rights came from some higher being does not suddenly create a higher being.

And there is where all your anger stems from... someone saying that there is a higher being than you... something more than man...

It does not anger me if you think there is a higher being. I have no idea if there is one, I just consider it irrelevant.

I don't consider the concept that our rights are bigger than the creation of man irrelevant

 

[SniperFire]

And there is where all your anger stems from... someone saying that there is a higher being than you... something more than man...

It does not anger me if you think there is a higher being. I have no idea if there is one, I just consider it irrelevant.

I don't consider the concept that our rights are bigger than the creation of man irrelevant

Not only is it relevant, our entire system is based on it.

 

[The T]

That is not how the USA was founded. See: Declaration of Independence.

You can toss God out of it if it makes you feel better, but it does not change the fact that the USA was founded as somewhat of a theocracy.

It was...and then it wasn't. See the First Amendment. However...the First Amendment was born on the religious precept of liberty to choose to worship in your own way, or not...and Government was to stay out of it.

.. as long as nobody stepped on the God-given inalienable rights.

At our core, we are a theocracy.

I agree. Free to do as you will while being careful of not treading on the liberties of others.

 

[DiamondDave]

You said "anti-religion". I think the assumption your are referring to God is a fair one.

I believe it was you who said "should" is not a right. I pointed out there are lots of "shoulds". The reality, whether you like that reality or not, is that whether you say a right comes from man, from God, from a higher power, or whatever makes not one bit of difference. There is no right which cannot be taken from you. You retain that right only so long as the society in which you live allows you to retain that right. If you are arrested by the police, put up against a wall and summarily executed, you can say the right to life comes from God but you are still dead. So, for all practical purposes, it doesn't matter where it comes from. The only thing that matters is how it is kept and that is only done by us.

EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT I NEVER MENTIONED GOD..... I was talking about the reasoning behind having the inalienable right attributed to a higher power or authority and not to man or the creations of man.... and the reason is EXACTLY what I said it was... you just can't take your little atheist head around the 'God' argument....

And it is not 'how it is kept' as in what government or society does... it is how we are in dealing with ourselves... you state that government can take away my right to, let's say the pursuit of happiness... I say that they can try, but because my right to life or the pursuit of happiness comes from something other than the creation of man, I can fight and even die for it because it still exists even if government would say it does not.... that is why stating it like it is stated in the founding documents is so goddamn important... it does not make the government the end all be all, the grand exalted poobah, or that which is the holder of the proverbial excaliber... it shows that the making of man (the government) can only go so far and that it can be taken down before that right can

You keep talking about the government and I keep talking about society. The government is only one aspect of society. When a lynch mob hangs a man, that is not the government - but the man is still dead. That is the work of your neighbors.

You say it is important to put this in the hands of a higher power to make it more powerful than the government. I argue that doing so simply transfers the power from one oppressor to another. These are our rights. We fought for them, we died for them. They belong to us. Not because some higher power gave them to us but because we took them. And we are not going to give them back. They are ours because we say they are ours and we require no greater authority than ourselves. Our leaders govern under our sufferance and our sufferance alone. The power they yield is not the power of some higher authority, it is ours and ours alone.

That's how you keep your rights.

There has to be and is an authority bigger than the mob.. than the actions of man...

The power a man can yield can destroy another man... but the seed of the inalienable rights was planted before these creations of man... and the fruit will be here long after what we have created is gone... which is why it is more than man, more than groups of man, and more than the power wielded by the choices and corruption of man

And whether you or I or someone else says they come from God, or from something that was created in the urge to live, or from some alien implant, or from a power that we have no concept of yet... that right exists beyond society, beyond the actions of evil people, beyond government, beyond all of that...