This Is So Moving: Elite School Tells Sixth Graders The Swastika Is A Symbol Of Peace

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I know the concept, dumbass, and it's entirely invalid. The same with God-given rights, they don't exist.

ROFL! (Invalid doesn't mean what you think it does... you should probably look it up)

In the Absence of God, Human Rights CANNOT Exist.

And this is because God-given rights come from the supreme authority in the Universe. Authority which stands far and away above human authority.

Thus no man can strip a human being of their God-given rights. Such rights are intrinsic to their very being. Kill the human being and they depart this life, with their rights wholly intact.

The Fallacy of "Civil Rights" or "Legal Rights" is that such rights require others to secure them... others are therefore responsible for those rights and others are thus the source of determination, in terms of their existence.

The individual themselves has no responsibility in sustaining the rights, as nothing they do provides that they deserve them, nothing they do can provide they are entitled to them... and nothing they do can return them, once whoever determines their existence, decides to take them away.

Thus... in the hearts of man, where a Right is merely a function of law, once the law is altered, they may throw a fuss and burn down their ghetto... but with a day or two, they'll concede to whatever the legal power requires and that will be that.

In the case of God-given rights... the Legal power that sets forth to remove those rights will draw back a bloody stump upon trying to remove that to which they have no right to take... from those who understand the nature of their right.

And THAT is why the Left strikes so often and so hard at American Principle and why their attack is so focuses on American Firearms.

It will not be today, Dexter... that is one thing of which we are dam' sure.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

...to exercise their God given rights....

God doesn't give you rights here, or anywhere for that matter, liberals like I do, and we are the ones protecting them as well.

Wrong. Mankind is BORN with all the rights possible. Asshats like you work to strip them away.

Mankind was born with no rights, not even the right to live. You have the Constitution, written by liberals.

Yes, the Constitution was written by liberals. Which is the diametric opposite of people like you... which is to say Anti-Liberal Progressives, socialists... .

Sadly for you and your point, no where in the Constitution does it convey a right to anyone. You're perhaps conflating the US Charter of Law, with the American Charter of Principle...

The US Charter of Law (USC) merely sets forth the scope of the US Federal Government, setting stark limits upon the power of that government, through the prohibition of law infringing upon the rights endowed by Nature's God, essential to the state of freedom... as declared in the American Charter of Freedom, resting at the cornerstone of the foundation of the nation itself; a foundation which expresses in no small measure of detail the recognition of, respect for and adherence to the laws of nature, as design by God and the rights endowed to mankind and the sacred responsibilities intrinsic to sustaining the means to exercise those rights.

But hey... as a member of the intellectually less fortunate anti-theist, Relativist... which is to say the antithesis of the American: OKA: The Advocate of Individual Liberty... there is NO WAY you could have possibly known that.

 

[jillian]

there is no such thing as a right that exists unless it is enforced.

Based upon what? And please.. be specific... at least as specific as your limited intellectual means allow.

it's always funny to have someone as stupid as you tell me my intellect is limited.

your inability to understand basic concepts does not make my intellect or anything else limited, wackadoodle.

but since you asked... how well did protection of "rights" go for the second generation japanese americans who got interned during WWII?

and why do you always shriek hysterically about your "right" to guns if the right exists no matter what government does.

yeah, that's what i thought, wackjob.

now perhaps you might consider going to school at some point. you might find it helpful.

 

[westwall]

Nope. You're a fucking progressive murderous scumbag. Every post you make says that. No liberal is for the mass murder of all mankind. Not one.

That is untrue, Mr. Troll. The notions are not mutually exclusive but you have to be able to keep more than one thought in your head at one time, and you can't manage half that.

Actually yes they are. Liberalism was a rejection of the King and big government. Progressivism is the exact opposite. It is the embrace of big, overpowering, intrusive government. As you say rights are granted by the government. Liberals KNOW they are not. Liberals KNOW that rights are innate.

there is no such thing as a right that exists unless it is enforced.

That is true. However, rights are not granted by the COTUS as is pointed out. What is codified are Rights that the government can't intrude upon. Rights must constantly be fought for to prevent progressives like PMH from stripping them away.

 

[westwall]

there is no such thing as a right that exists unless it is enforced.

Based upon what? And please.. be specific... at least as specific as your limited intellectual means allow.

it's always funny to have someone as stupid as you tell me my intellect is limited.

your inability to understand basic concepts does not make my intellect or anything else limited, wackadoodle.

but since you asked... how well did protection of "rights" go for the second generation japanese americans who got interned during WWII?

and why do you always shriek hysterically about your "right" to guns if the right exists no matter what government does.

yeah, that's what i thought, wackjob.

now perhaps you might consider going to school at some point. you might find it helpful.

That was a clear overreach of the government. Totally, and completely illegal. And lo and behold the government paid reparations for that illegal behavior. There were many in government who opposed FDR's actions. They were however sadly outnumbered by our very own progressives who couldn't be bothered to follow the law.

 

[jillian]

Nope. You're a fucking progressive murderous scumbag. Every post you make says that. No liberal is for the mass murder of all mankind. Not one.

That is untrue, Mr. Troll. The notions are not mutually exclusive but you have to be able to keep more than one thought in your head at one time, and you can't manage half that.

Actually yes they are. Liberalism was a rejection of the King and big government. Progressivism is the exact opposite. It is the embrace of big, overpowering, intrusive government. As you say rights are granted by the government. Liberals KNOW they are not. Liberals KNOW that rights are innate.

there is no such thing as a right that exists unless it is enforced.

That is true. However, rights are not granted by the COTUS as is pointed out. What is codified are Rights that the government can't intrude upon. Rights must constantly be fought for to prevent progressives like PMH from stripping them away.

that's an interesting philosophical construct. and yes, it's something that is amusing to discuss. but the reality is that our rights in this country... at least our enforceable rights.... come from the constitution, the decisions interpreting it and our statutes.

that's all she wrote in real life.

 

[jillian]

there is no such thing as a right that exists unless it is enforced.

Based upon what? And please.. be specific... at least as specific as your limited intellectual means allow.

it's always funny to have someone as stupid as you tell me my intellect is limited.

your inability to understand basic concepts does not make my intellect or anything else limited, wackadoodle.

but since you asked... how well did protection of "rights" go for the second generation japanese americans who got interned during WWII?

and why do you always shriek hysterically about your "right" to guns if the right exists no matter what government does.

yeah, that's what i thought, wackjob.

now perhaps you might consider going to school at some point. you might find it helpful.

That was a clear overreach of the government. Totally, and completely illegal. And lo and behold the government paid reparations for that illegal behavior. There were many in government who opposed FDR's actions. They were however sadly outnumbered by our very own progressives who couldn't be bothered to follow the law.

i, of course, agree with you. and yet Korematsu is still good law and has never been overturned.

i'd also add that what you believe are rights and what i believe are rights may differ. but we're both bound by the Court and what it says.

i was reminded by a friend of mine this week that first day in law school his contracts professor asked the class "what is law".

the answer" "whatever the court says it is".

and, ultimately, that's true. because what is also true is that you can't raise arms against your government. you can ask for what you want.... but there are always opposing beliefs.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

... a strict adherent to the principles of individual rights and responsibilities.

That's a liberal, not a Christian.

Individual rights is liberal ideology? Explain Obamacare and what right I have to opt out? Fool,

You are going to pay up either way, because society is going to be paying either way. Welcome to Rights and Responsibilities...

Your dodge is noted. What right do I have to opt out?

You don't, nor should you have the option. You can either buy in or pay up? Your choice.

Like I suggested, liberals don't believe in individual liberty and you proved it yourself. You see, government doesn't grant our liberties, they are inalienable and forced healthcare insurance isn't one of them. Their are many examples of liberal policies that take away our individual liberty. Progressive = socialist = communist and fascist.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

i, of course, agree with you.

Golly, I bet that comes as a great relief...

i'd also add that what you believe are rights and what i believe are rights may differ.

Yes, I expect that's true, given that you do not even know what a Right IS.

i was reminded by a friend of mine this week that first day in law school his contracts professor asked the class "what is law".

the answer" "whatever the court says it is".

Golly... I wonder how many drones have swallowed that drivel? Not you of course, given that you've clearly never set foot on law school.

and, ultimately, that's true.

ROFLMNAO! I say it HERE and it comes out ^ THERE ^ ...

 

[westwall]

there is no such thing as a right that exists unless it is enforced.

Based upon what? And please.. be specific... at least as specific as your limited intellectual means allow.

it's always funny to have someone as stupid as you tell me my intellect is limited.

your inability to understand basic concepts does not make my intellect or anything else limited, wackadoodle.

but since you asked... how well did protection of "rights" go for the second generation japanese americans who got interned during WWII?

and why do you always shriek hysterically about your "right" to guns if the right exists no matter what government does.

yeah, that's what i thought, wackjob.

now perhaps you might consider going to school at some point. you might find it helpful.

That was a clear overreach of the government. Totally, and completely illegal. And lo and behold the government paid reparations for that illegal behavior. There were many in government who opposed FDR's actions. They were however sadly outnumbered by our very own progressives who couldn't be bothered to follow the law.

i, of course, agree with you. and yet Korematsu is still good law and has never been overturned.

i'd also add that what you believe are rights and what i believe are rights may differ. but we're both bound by the Court and what it says.

i was reminded by a friend of mine this week that first day in law school his contracts professor asked the class "what is law".

the answer" "whatever the court says it is".

and, ultimately, that's true. because what is also true is that you can't raise arms against your government. you can ask for what you want.... but there are always opposing beliefs.

I agree with this to a point. However the Founders knew that eventually the government would become oppressive as all governments do so made sure that as Jefferson said in the Federalist Papers...

 

[westwall]

Nope. You're a fucking progressive murderous scumbag. Every post you make says that. No liberal is for the mass murder of all mankind. Not one.

That is untrue, Mr. Troll. The notions are not mutually exclusive but you have to be able to keep more than one thought in your head at one time, and you can't manage half that.

Actually yes they are. Liberalism was a rejection of the King and big government. Progressivism is the exact opposite. It is the embrace of big, overpowering, intrusive government. As you say rights are granted by the government. Liberals KNOW they are not. Liberals KNOW that rights are innate.

there is no such thing as a right that exists unless it is enforced.

That is true. However, rights are not granted by the COTUS as is pointed out. What is codified are Rights that the government can't intrude upon. Rights must constantly be fought for to prevent progressives like PMH from stripping them away.

that's an interesting philosophical construct. and yes, it's something that is amusing to discuss. but the reality is that our rights in this country... at least our enforceable rights.... come from the constitution, the decisions interpreting it and our statutes.

that's all she wrote in real life.

Here I disagree with you. The COTUS merely says which rights can't be screwed with. The job of the PEOPLE is to make sure that politicians don't abuse their power. Ultimately that is what the BOR is all about.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

there is no such thing as a right that exists unless it is enforced.

Based upon what? And please.. be specific... at least as specific as your limited intellectual means allow.

it's always funny to have someone as stupid as you tell me my intellect is limited.

your inability to understand basic concepts does not make my intellect or anything else limited, wackadoodle.

but since you asked... how well did protection of "rights" go for the second generation japanese americans who got interned during WWII?

and why do you always shriek hysterically about your "right" to guns if the right exists no matter what government does.

yeah, that's what i thought, wackjob.

now perhaps you might consider going to school at some point. you might find it helpful.

So what you're trying very hard NOT TO SAY, is that you have no foundation in reason for your ridiculous notion that a right can't exist, if it isn't enforced?

My favorite part is where you cited the internment of the Japanese, who were interned BY A LIBERAL... after their race attacked the US without warning... thus creating certain 'trust' issues with the devious Nips.

Anywho... setting aside all that, you claim that a right can't exist if it's not enforced, then cry that the Japanese were interned, despite otherwise being entitled to be free.

The problem ya have there, is that the moment they were interned, as your would be thesis holds, the Japanese had no right to be free. Thus, there is no potential for all the angst you're pouring over it, yet there ya were weeping and gnashing your Leftist tooth... .

So, my guess is that somewhere in that soup you 'feel' with, there's some sense that they had a right which was usurped, which in truth, in no way took from them the right, only the means to exercise it.

Thus, once again, refuting your foolish nonsense.

And yes... My God-given right to defend my means to exercise my rights from the threat represented by people such as yourself and your anti-theist (Anti-American) nonsense, stands intrinsic to my being and as a result I exercise that right; and all of my other rights, without regard to what you or any government says about that right or any other.

That you lack the intellectual means to understand the concept, in no way alters the validity of the concept. That you can't understand it... is only a plus in the endless entertainment department.

Reader, remember, that the Key to defeating Leftist in debate, rest in two fundamental elements:

1- Find a Leftist.

2- Get them to SPEAK!

 

[AvgGuyIA]

I know you're all down on Christianity, but Jesus is comin' back and he's going to fix all this.

He's roughly 2,000 years overdue BTW.

“For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.“ (Matthew 16: 27, 28)

The last book of the Bible is fuck-all nuts BTW. It should, like the Gospel named for John, never have been included.

An atheist quoting and interpreting scripture out of context. Laughable. He wasn't referring to his second coming.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I know you're all down on Christianity, but Jesus is comin' back and he's going to fix all this.

He's roughly 2,000 years overdue BTW.

“For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.“ (Matthew 16: 27, 28)

The last book of the Bible is fuck-all nuts BTW. It should, like the Gospel named for John, never have been included.

An atheist quoting and interpreting scripture out of context. Laughable. He wasn't referring to his second coming.

Yes, he was. That is when the Kingdom of God takes effect

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Well it appears that the would be 'Barrister' has conceded... as one should reasonably expect she would.

But hey... she does the very best she can, bless her lil' black heart.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

That's a liberal, not a Christian.

Individual rights is liberal ideology? Explain Obamacare and what right I have to opt out? Fool,

You are going to pay up either way, because society is going to be paying either way. Welcome to Rights and Responsibilities...

Your dodge is noted. What right do I have to opt out?

You don't, nor should you have the option. You can either buy in or pay up? Your choice.

Like I suggested, liberals don't believe in individual liberty and you proved it yourself. You see, government doesn't grant our liberties, they are inalienable and forced healthcare insurance isn't one of them. Their are many examples of liberal policies that take away our individual liberty. Progressive = socialist = communist and fascist.

Liberalism isn't anarchy.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

I know you're all down on Christianity, but Jesus is comin' back and he's going to fix all this.

He's roughly 2,000 years overdue BTW.

“For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.“ (Matthew 16: 27, 28)

The last book of the Bible is fuck-all nuts BTW. It should, like the Gospel named for John, never have been included.

An atheist quoting and interpreting scripture out of context. Laughable. He wasn't referring to his second coming.

Yes, he was. That is when the Kingdom of God takes effect

No. The Day of Pentecost...with fire, wind, speaking of tongues and the presence of the Holy Spirit. 50 days after his resurrection. All the disciples were there except Judas who was dead, fulfilling the prophesy of "some of you".

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I know the concept, dumbass, and it's entirely invalid. The same with God-given rights, they don't exist.

In the Absence of God, Human Rights CANNOT Exist.

BS. Whole nations that don't believe in your God have rights.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I know you're all down on Christianity, but Jesus is comin' back and he's going to fix all this.

He's roughly 2,000 years overdue BTW.

“For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.“ (Matthew 16: 27, 28)

The last book of the Bible is fuck-all nuts BTW. It should, like the Gospel named for John, never have been included.

An atheist quoting and interpreting scripture out of context. Laughable. He wasn't referring to his second coming.

Yes, he was. That is when the Kingdom of God takes effect

No. The Day of Pentecost...with fire, wind, speaking of tongues and the presence of the Holy Spirit. 50 days after his resurrection. All the disciples were there except Judas who was dead, fulfilling the prophesy of "some of you".

That is not what the Kingdom, meaning Reign, of God is.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Nope. You're a fucking progressive murderous scumbag. Every post you make says that. No liberal is for the mass murder of all mankind. Not one.

That is untrue, Mr. Troll. The notions are not mutually exclusive but you have to be able to keep more than one thought in your head at one time, and you can't manage half that.

Actually yes they are. Liberalism was a rejection of the King and big government. Progressivism is the exact opposite. It is the embrace of big, overpowering, intrusive government. As you say rights are granted by the government. Liberals KNOW they are not. Liberals KNOW that rights are innate.

there is no such thing as a right that exists unless it is enforced.

That is true. However, rights are not granted by the COTUS as is pointed out. What is codified are Rights that the government can't intrude upon. Rights must constantly be fought for to prevent progressives like PMH from stripping them away.

Read the Burka thread, I defend rights, except for guns.