God given rights?

[JohnA]

The male sperm carries i believe 23 chromosomes, where the female carries the other half. Until those two meet up you only have half a product.

I see what you are saying and i think you are wrong in saying it doesnt have unique DNA, but it would be cherry picking.

I'm not really sure whether we are agreeing or disagreeing. So let me try to explain my point and you tell me if I am off base.

A sperm is a cell from the male. It has exactly the same DNA as any other cell in the male body. It is not unique. The egg is a cell from the female. It has exactly the same DNA as any other cell in the female. It is not unique. When the egg is fertilized by the sperm, it creates a zygote. This has an entirely unique DNA, different than either the male or female. It is a completely new human being.

That is 100% correct and deserved highlighting...

again yes its unigue but has not developed into a human being YET ..
on its own its just a * mass * with out help it will die. but with the support and help of the mother it may *develop* into a new human being. ITS HER CHOICE .
Unless of course you are saying a zygote is already a human


In animal development, the term zygote is also used more loosely to refer to the group of cells formed by the first few cell divisions, although this is properly referred to as a morula.[2]

In mammalian reproduction, after fertilization has taken place the zygote travels down the fallopian tube, while dividing to form more cells[3] without the zygote actually increasing in size. This cell division is mitotic, and is known as cleavage.[4] All mammals go through the zygote stage of life. Mammalian zygotes eventually develop into a blastocyst, after which they are more generally termed an embryo, and then a fetus.

A human zygote exists for about four days, and becomes a blastocyst on the fifth day.[5]

 

[onecut39]

You are not suppossed to understand you are suppossed to believe. There is an old saying
" I had rather live my life as if there were a God and die and find out there isn't than to live my life as if there were NO God and die and find our there is"

Believing is not hard, it just requires accpetance.

Pascal's Wager (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

This is a lot simpler...........and harder to refute.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

- Epicurus [341–270 B.C.]

 

[GuyPinestra]

You are not suppossed to understand you are suppossed to believe. There is an old saying
" I had rather live my life as if there were a God and die and find out there isn't than to live my life as if there were NO God and die and find our there is"

Believing is not hard, it just requires accpetance.

Pascal's Wager (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

This is a lot simpler...........and harder to refute.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

- Epicurus [341–270 B.C.]

It would take several paragraphs to explain to you the righteousness of God's allowing the evil we see in this fallen world, but I'm almost certain it would be a waste of my minimal typing skills to do so. The beauty of the free will that God gave you is that you can use it for whatever purpose your heart desires, good or evil.

We can see what the vast majority of humanity has chosen, and it isn't good.

 

[boilermaker55]

When you're sitting in a concentration camp and experiencing the failings of the "laws of men" --- tell me who YOU are gonna appeal to for your rights....

So your solution is to sit and pray for some divine intervention.
Or maybe have some other entity that really has a compassion for others and the morals that they preach.

 

[GuyPinestra]

When you're sitting in a concentration camp and experiencing the failings of the "laws of men" --- tell me who YOU are gonna appeal to for your rights....

So your solution is to sit and pray for some divine intervention.
Or maybe have some other entity that really has a compassion for others and the morals that they preach.

We've been forewarned, you know?

John 16:33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

True Christians expect persecution, derision and disdain, and you've yet to disappoint.

We don't pray for deliverance, just endurance.

 

[flacaltenn]

When you're sitting in a concentration camp and experiencing the failings of the "laws of men" --- tell me who YOU are gonna appeal to for your rights....

So your solution is to sit and pray for some divine intervention.
Or maybe have some other entity that really has a compassion for others and the morals that they preach.

Naww.. See I explained that to others who also thought this was all about prayer.. It's not. It's the realization that even when I'm dying in a concentration camp, that my rights are NOT in the hands of the fiends who misuse their power. That REASONABLE people understand the absence of humility and morality on the part of man-made laws. That's exactly why the Founders told you that would NOT attempt to list your rights. That they come from a HIGHER power than the state and the Founders had the humility and wisdom to acknowledge that.

OTHERWISE -- the godless secular humanists have NOTHING other than offering what lefties often accuse the religious right and libertarians of --- That you must STRUGGLE to preserve any right that you think you are entitled to. Law of Jungle -- Might Makes Right -- Blood in the streets to establish individual dignity and rights. Don't believe me -- look at their arguments on this thread.

Sitting in that Concentration with that point of view -- I win -- even if there's a boot on my neck..

I guess -- you would prefer to lose eh?

 

[JohnA]

Pascal's Wager (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

This is a lot simpler...........and harder to refute.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

- Epicurus [341–270 B.C.]

It would take several paragraphs to explain to you the righteousness of God's allowing the evil we see in this fallen world, but I'm almost certain it would be a waste of my minimal typing skills to do so. The beauty of the free will that God gave you is that you can use it for whatever purpose your heart desires, good or evil.

We can see what the vast majority of humanity has chosen, and it isn't good.

sure we have free will
free will to kill those who dont follow our religious doctrine ,
free will to abuse little boys as in the catholic church
free will to hate those who live a alternative lifestye .and then invent a devil (evil) and blame hm for all the bad things , while at the same time inventing a god (good ) and let him take the credit for all the good things in life .

meanwhile those of us who dont have a deity take full responsibility for all the things we do good or bad .. ...no passing the buck

of course we take the other road and say god is all powefull *omnipotent* and made everything so therefore he made (satan ) and give us the choice (free will ) to follow him so he must condone evil therefore he cant be a good and loving god he must be *malevolent*
CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS

 

[GuyPinestra]

This is a lot simpler...........and harder to refute.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

- Epicurus [341–270 B.C.]

It would take several paragraphs to explain to you the righteousness of God's allowing the evil we see in this fallen world, but I'm almost certain it would be a waste of my minimal typing skills to do so. The beauty of the free will that God gave you is that you can use it for whatever purpose your heart desires, good or evil.

We can see what the vast majority of humanity has chosen, and it isn't good.

sure we have free will
free will to kill those who dont follow our religious doctrine ,
free will to abuse little boys as in the catholic church
free will to hate those who live a alternative lifestye .and then invent a devil (evil) and blame hm for all the bad things , while at the same time inventing a god (good ) and let him take the credit for all the good things in life .

meanwhile those of us who dont have a deity take full responsibility for all the things we do good or bad .. ...no passing the buck

You must've been an altar boy... Seek counseling for your rage issues, you'll feel better.

 

[JohnA]

It would take several paragraphs to explain to you the righteousness of God's allowing the evil we see in this fallen world, but I'm almost certain it would be a waste of my minimal typing skills to do so. The beauty of the free will that God gave you is that you can use it for whatever purpose your heart desires, good or evil.

We can see what the vast majority of humanity has chosen, and it isn't good.

sure we have free will
free will to kill those who dont follow our religious doctrine ,
free will to abuse little boys as in the catholic church
free will to hate those who live a alternative lifestye .and then invent a devil (evil) and blame hm for all the bad things , while at the same time inventing a god (good ) and let him take the credit for all the good things in life .

meanwhile those of us who dont have a deity take full responsibility for all the things we do good or bad .. ...no passing the buck

You must've been an altar boy... Seek counseling for your rage issues, you'll feel better.

Never was
were you ? there must be some reason for your adoration of ancient superstition

 

[GuyPinestra]

sure we have free will
free will to kill those who dont follow our religious doctrine ,
free will to abuse little boys as in the catholic church
free will to hate those who live a alternative lifestye .and then invent a devil (evil) and blame hm for all the bad things , while at the same time inventing a god (good ) and let him take the credit for all the good things in life .

meanwhile those of us who dont have a deity take full responsibility for all the things we do good or bad .. ...no passing the buck

You must've been an altar boy... Seek counseling for your rage issues, you'll feel better.

Never was
were you ? there must be some reason for your adoration of ancient superstition

My 'adoration' comes from the personal relationship I have with God through His Son Jesus. It's a relationship that has had it's ups and downs, to be sure, but I have utmost confidence in the love God has for me. (And you, for that matter) I'm sorry that your life experiences have shut you out from the one thing that would heal all your hate, I'll pray for you, OK?

 

[PratchettFan]

When you're sitting in a concentration camp and experiencing the failings of the "laws of men" --- tell me who YOU are gonna appeal to for your rights....

So your solution is to sit and pray for some divine intervention.
Or maybe have some other entity that really has a compassion for others and the morals that they preach.

Naww.. See I explained that to others who also thought this was all about prayer.. It's not. It's the realization that even when I'm dying in a concentration camp, that my rights are NOT in the hands of the fiends who misuse their power. That REASONABLE people understand the absence of humility and morality on the part of man-made laws. That's exactly why the Founders told you that would NOT attempt to list your rights. That they come from a HIGHER power than the state and the Founders had the humility and wisdom to acknowledge that.

OTHERWISE -- the godless secular humanists have NOTHING other than offering what lefties often accuse the religious right and libertarians of --- That you must STRUGGLE to preserve any right that you think you are entitled to. Law of Jungle -- Might Makes Right -- Blood in the streets to establish individual dignity and rights. Don't believe me -- look at their arguments on this thread.

Sitting in that Concentration with that point of view -- I win -- even if there's a boot on my neck..

I guess -- you would prefer to lose eh?

What you seem to be saying is that "rights" have nothing to do with physical reality. No matter what is being done to you, you still have "rights". I can imprison you without trial, take away everything which is yours, torture you and murder you, and none of that matters because you have "rights".

This word "rights" keeps getting used. To me, a "right" is a legal term meaning a protection against social action. I can't be imprisoned without trial because the law says I can't. That is a "right." If I can, then I don't have that "right". You clearly don't see it that way. So how do you define "rights"?

 

[GuyPinestra]

So your solution is to sit and pray for some divine intervention.
Or maybe have some other entity that really has a compassion for others and the morals that they preach.

Naww.. See I explained that to others who also thought this was all about prayer.. It's not. It's the realization that even when I'm dying in a concentration camp, that my rights are NOT in the hands of the fiends who misuse their power. That REASONABLE people understand the absence of humility and morality on the part of man-made laws. That's exactly why the Founders told you that would NOT attempt to list your rights. That they come from a HIGHER power than the state and the Founders had the humility and wisdom to acknowledge that.

OTHERWISE -- the godless secular humanists have NOTHING other than offering what lefties often accuse the religious right and libertarians of --- That you must STRUGGLE to preserve any right that you think you are entitled to. Law of Jungle -- Might Makes Right -- Blood in the streets to establish individual dignity and rights. Don't believe me -- look at their arguments on this thread.

Sitting in that Concentration with that point of view -- I win -- even if there's a boot on my neck..

I guess -- you would prefer to lose eh?

What you seem to be saying is that "rights" have nothing to do with physical reality. No matter what is being done to you, you still have "rights". I can imprison you without trial, take away everything which is yours, torture you and murder you, and none of that matters because you have "rights".

This word "rights" keeps getting used. To me, a "right" is a legal term meaning a protection against social action. I can't be imprisoned without trial because the law says I can't. That is a "right." If I can, then I don't have that "right". You clearly don't see it that way. So how do you define "rights"?

History is a never-ending litany of tyrants and despots stomping on the rights of men. The 'Great American Experiment' has been the longest running example of those rights being protected by the government, and that didn't happen until it was recognized that those rights actually came from a Power higher than government.

Why would anyone want to go back??

 

[SniperFire]

Naww.. See I explained that to others who also thought this was all about prayer.. It's not. It's the realization that even when I'm dying in a concentration camp, that my rights are NOT in the hands of the fiends who misuse their power. That REASONABLE people understand the absence of humility and morality on the part of man-made laws. That's exactly why the Founders told you that would NOT attempt to list your rights. That they come from a HIGHER power than the state and the Founders had the humility and wisdom to acknowledge that.

OTHERWISE -- the godless secular humanists have NOTHING other than offering what lefties often accuse the religious right and libertarians of --- That you must STRUGGLE to preserve any right that you think you are entitled to. Law of Jungle -- Might Makes Right -- Blood in the streets to establish individual dignity and rights. Don't believe me -- look at their arguments on this thread.

Sitting in that Concentration with that point of view -- I win -- even if there's a boot on my neck..

I guess -- you would prefer to lose eh?

What you seem to be saying is that "rights" have nothing to do with physical reality. No matter what is being done to you, you still have "rights". I can imprison you without trial, take away everything which is yours, torture you and murder you, and none of that matters because you have "rights".

This word "rights" keeps getting used. To me, a "right" is a legal term meaning a protection against social action. I can't be imprisoned without trial because the law says I can't. That is a "right." If I can, then I don't have that "right". You clearly don't see it that way. So how do you define "rights"?

History is a never-ending litany of tyrants and despots stomping on the rights of men. The 'Great American Experiment' has been the longest running example of those rights being protected by the government, and that didn't happen until it was recognized that those rights actually came from a Power higher than government.

Why would anyone want to go back??

Pratchett Fan simply refuses to acknowledge that the Declaration of Independence proves the United States of America was founded as a defacto theocracy on July 4, 1776.

 

[PratchettFan]

Naww.. See I explained that to others who also thought this was all about prayer.. It's not. It's the realization that even when I'm dying in a concentration camp, that my rights are NOT in the hands of the fiends who misuse their power. That REASONABLE people understand the absence of humility and morality on the part of man-made laws. That's exactly why the Founders told you that would NOT attempt to list your rights. That they come from a HIGHER power than the state and the Founders had the humility and wisdom to acknowledge that.

OTHERWISE -- the godless secular humanists have NOTHING other than offering what lefties often accuse the religious right and libertarians of --- That you must STRUGGLE to preserve any right that you think you are entitled to. Law of Jungle -- Might Makes Right -- Blood in the streets to establish individual dignity and rights. Don't believe me -- look at their arguments on this thread.

Sitting in that Concentration with that point of view -- I win -- even if there's a boot on my neck..

I guess -- you would prefer to lose eh?

What you seem to be saying is that "rights" have nothing to do with physical reality. No matter what is being done to you, you still have "rights". I can imprison you without trial, take away everything which is yours, torture you and murder you, and none of that matters because you have "rights".

This word "rights" keeps getting used. To me, a "right" is a legal term meaning a protection against social action. I can't be imprisoned without trial because the law says I can't. That is a "right." If I can, then I don't have that "right". You clearly don't see it that way. So how do you define "rights"?

History is a never-ending litany of tyrants and despots stomping on the rights of men. The 'Great American Experiment' has been the longest running example of those rights being protected by the government, and that didn't happen until it was recognized that those rights actually came from a Power higher than government.

Why would anyone want to go back??

That doesn't answser the question and it is an inaccurate statement. We have the longest run in protecting rights because we are a nations of laws. If you want to see an excellent example of rights coming from a higher power, read up on the Inquisition. Why would you want to go back?

 

[PratchettFan]

What you seem to be saying is that "rights" have nothing to do with physical reality. No matter what is being done to you, you still have "rights". I can imprison you without trial, take away everything which is yours, torture you and murder you, and none of that matters because you have "rights".

This word "rights" keeps getting used. To me, a "right" is a legal term meaning a protection against social action. I can't be imprisoned without trial because the law says I can't. That is a "right." If I can, then I don't have that "right". You clearly don't see it that way. So how do you define "rights"?

History is a never-ending litany of tyrants and despots stomping on the rights of men. The 'Great American Experiment' has been the longest running example of those rights being protected by the government, and that didn't happen until it was recognized that those rights actually came from a Power higher than government.

Why would anyone want to go back??

Pratchett Fan simply refuses to acknowledge that the Declaration of Independence proves the United States of America was founded as a defacto theocracy on July 4, 1776.

Of course I don't acknowledge that. It's silly.

 

[SniperFire]

We have the longest run in protecting rights because we are a nations of laws.

Every nation has laws. What makes our laws stand when the laws of other nations fail?

The laws stand because they are based on rights which are inalienable and granted by God.

 

[SniperFire]

History is a never-ending litany of tyrants and despots stomping on the rights of men. The 'Great American Experiment' has been the longest running example of those rights being protected by the government, and that didn't happen until it was recognized that those rights actually came from a Power higher than government.

Why would anyone want to go back??

Pratchett Fan simply refuses to acknowledge that the Declaration of Independence proves the United States of America was founded as a defacto theocracy on July 4, 1776.

Of course I don't acknowledge that. It's silly.

Read it sometime.

 

[konradv]

We have the longest run in protecting rights because we are a nations of laws.

Every nation has laws. What makes our laws stand when the laws of other nations fail?

The laws stand because they are based on rights which are inalienable and granted by God.

The laws stand because we've set up a system that protects them. You can say they're God-given all you want, but without an authority to enforce them, they're just words.

 

[GuyPinestra]

What you seem to be saying is that "rights" have nothing to do with physical reality. No matter what is being done to you, you still have "rights". I can imprison you without trial, take away everything which is yours, torture you and murder you, and none of that matters because you have "rights".

This word "rights" keeps getting used. To me, a "right" is a legal term meaning a protection against social action. I can't be imprisoned without trial because the law says I can't. That is a "right." If I can, then I don't have that "right". You clearly don't see it that way. So how do you define "rights"?

History is a never-ending litany of tyrants and despots stomping on the rights of men. The 'Great American Experiment' has been the longest running example of those rights being protected by the government, and that didn't happen until it was recognized that those rights actually came from a Power higher than government.

Why would anyone want to go back??

That doesn't answser the question and it is an inaccurate statement. We have the longest run in protecting rights because we are a nations of laws. If you want to see an excellent example of rights coming from a higher power, read up on the Inquisition. Why would you want to go back?

The first sentences of the Declaration of Independence...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

I think the guys that started this thing had the right idea...

 

[SniperFire]

We have the longest run in protecting rights because we are a nations of laws.

Every nation has laws. What makes our laws stand when the laws of other nations fail?

The laws stand because they are based on rights which are inalienable and granted by God.

The laws stand because we've set up a system that protects them. You can say they're God-given all you want, but without an authority to enforce them, they're just words.

You are just babbling empty rhetoric.

Every nation has laws and a system to protect them.

What makes ours uniquely protected?