What "rights" does nature give us?

[Procrustes Stretched]

My guess is she's dropped her nail file and wants to get the foolishness over with. But she says she loves me, so there you have it! Proof positive that love = tangible item. (not true; in fact google "list of tangible items." Love, freedom, best color of red, etc, ain't on the list. They'd be intangibles.)

Is the value of anything based on whether it is tangible?

My freedoms and my loves are the most valuable aspects of my life.

They tried that intangible thing before on me, I still don't know how not being able to touch something makes it not real.

love and freedom? you can touch them? of course not because they are abstract concepts

 

[Michelle420]

the fact that many people were not considered“people” in late eighteenth century America. No women, African Americans, or Indians and few individuals without property were allowed to cast votes. More significantly, no one alive today had anything to do with the ratification process. As Thomas Jefferson famously insisted, the world belongs to the living. It is hard to see how even a pristine process that perfectly captured the views of eighteenth century America can bind the very different people who populate the United States today.

http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1160&context=fwps_papers

Why are we bound to constitutional obedience anyway, the document was written pre-industrialization and bias it excluded many in that (we the people) schpeel.

Because we are a nation of laws and not men .. and we have a process to change what we want to. All you need to do is convince your fellow citizens of your brilliant and special gifts and we will follow your lead,,,,

We are not bound to the document and Lincoln was constitutionally disobedient in his timeline


What are Constitutions for ?

"The Constitution of the United States was a layman's document, not a lawyer's contract."

Since it was written over 200 years ago and during a time of slave labor that offered no representation for many folks in the minority I see no reason to blind obedience.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is the value of anything based on whether it is tangible?

My freedoms and my loves are the most valuable aspects of my life.

They tried that intangible thing before on me, I still don't know how not being able to touch something makes it not real.

love and freedom? you can touch them? of course not because they are abstract concepts

We already know you think they are hard to understand.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

1. Not at all. Merely differentiating concepts and material objects, since that was getting confused by you and others.

2. Glad they're working out for you, and fingers crossed you don't change your mind, and with it, their existence, for you. (noodle on that, and you'll see how they're both conceptual.)

The people that are confused are the idiots that think intangible means unreal.

Magnetic fields are not tangible. Nevertheless, they are clearly real. Nuetrinoes are also not tangible. They are also very real. Evolution isn't tangle, and it's also very real.

Definition of TANGIBLE
1) a : capable of being perceived especially by the sense of touch : palpable
b : substantially real : material

2) : capable of being precisely identified or realized by the mind <her grief was tangible>

3) : capable of being appraised at an actual or approximate value <tangible assets>

----

now what definition is it people were/are using?

 

[AVG-JOE]

read John Locke

I have.

He's wrong about "natural rights".

Nature..as we define it..is pretty different from human constructs.

In nature, rights are defined by groups of animals banding together.

And by the animals in that group.

Sound familiar?

Natural Rights sound like survival of the fittest to me.

If you can't cut it then your prey for something or someone who can.

Sure would be a lot of fit folks out there and no weak, ill or elderly if this were the case.

You don't think that's not been happening through out history?

The power of being Physically fit only counts among the animals who aren't smart enough to figure out the power behind controlling resources, especially human resources. Monkeys figured that out about 10,000 years ago and haven't looked back. Monkeys are the source of their imagined 'rights'.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Really? The fact that people, and animals, have a natural inclination to be free doesn't prove that it the concept of freedom is not man made concept? Can you explain that without resorting to insults?

Didn't think so, so use insults and feel free not to explain it.

You equating animal instincts and urges with human nature? Mankind has evolved beyond others in the animal kingdom. Animals don't have art, but they piss and shit in patterns. Some can even mimic humans. But conceptually the rest of the animals are far behind. Animals yearn for freedom? I don't think so. They may want to roam as instinct and their natures demand, but the concept of freedom? Whooweee

I am not doing anything of the sort.

What I am pointing out is that the desire for freedom is not a human construct, it exists outside humanity.

In the context of natural rights being freedom, it is a human construct.

As far as yearning and instincts to roam wild, what a social animal wants (not all animals as some are loners) is to be wild and follow it's instincts...that is not the same thing as the human concept of freedom...and you know better

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1160&context=fwps_papers

Why are we bound to constitutional obedience anyway, the document was written pre-industrialization and bias it excluded many in that (we the people) schpeel.

Because we are a nation of laws and not men .. and we have a process to change what we want to. All you need to do is convince your fellow citizens of your brilliant and special gifts and we will follow your lead,,,,

We are not bound to the document and Lincoln was constitutionally disobedient in his timeline


What are Constitutions for ?

"The Constitution of the United States was a layman's document, not a lawyer's contract."

Since it was written over 200 years ago and during a time of slave labor that offered no representation for many folks in the minority I see no reason to blind obedience.

We are bound to the document. Lincoln and others challenged how to act within the boundaries of the document, but given the urgency and threats of civil war...you really should do some reading.

The preamble to the US Constitution tells us what it is for...

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Blind obedience? you really need to grow up

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

They tried that intangible thing before on me, I still don't know how not being able to touch something makes it not real.

love and freedom? you can touch them? of course not because they are abstract concepts

We already know you think they are hard to understand.

stop being a friggin' idiot. It gets boring

 

[Michelle420]

Because we are a nation of laws and not men .. and we have a process to change what we want to. All you need to do is convince your fellow citizens of your brilliant and special gifts and we will follow your lead,,,,

We are not bound to the document and Lincoln was constitutionally disobedient in his timeline


What are Constitutions for ?

"The Constitution of the United States was a layman's document, not a lawyer's contract."

Since it was written over 200 years ago and during a time of slave labor that offered no representation for many folks in the minority I see no reason to blind obedience.

We are bound to the document. Lincoln and others challenged how to act within the boundaries of the document, but given the urgency and threats of civil war...you really should do some reading.

The preamble to the US Constitution tells us what it is for...

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Blind obedience? you really need to grow up

We are not bound to anything as human beings, we are born into socially constructed civilizations that expect us to adhere to rules setup perhaps over 200 years ago that from the get go was hypocritical in that "we the people" were not allowed a chance to even vote on this constitution, only white men had that honor.

 

[AVG-JOE]

We are not bound to the document and Lincoln was constitutionally disobedient in his timeline


What are Constitutions for ?

"The Constitution of the United States was a layman's document, not a lawyer's contract."

Since it was written over 200 years ago and during a time of slave labor that offered no representation for many folks in the minority I see no reason to blind obedience.

We are bound to the document. Lincoln and others challenged how to act within the boundaries of the document, but given the urgency and threats of civil war...you really should do some reading.

The preamble to the US Constitution tells us what it is for...

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Blind obedience? you really need to grow up

We are not bound to anything as human beings, we are born into socially constructed civilizations that expect us to adhere to rules setup perhaps over 200 years ago that from the get go was hypocritical in that "we the people" were not allowed a chance to even vote on this constitution, only white men had that honor.

That doesn't necessarily mean it's not a worthy document to organize behind.

 

[Murf76]

http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1160&context=fwps_papers

Why are we bound to constitutional obedience anyway, the document was written pre-industrialization and bias it excluded many in that (we the people) schpeel.

Because we are a nation of laws and not men .. and we have a process to change what we want to. All you need to do is convince your fellow citizens of your brilliant and special gifts and we will follow your lead,,,,

We are not bound to the document and Lincoln was constitutionally disobedient in his timeline


What are Constitutions for ?

"The Constitution of the United States was a layman's document, not a lawyer's contract."

Since it was written over 200 years ago and during a time of slave labor that offered no representation for many folks in the minority I see no reason to blind obedience.

Does it never occur to you people that without the U.S. Constitution, the federal government has no authority over any of us? Doesn't even exist. We go back to being 50 separate States. Kind of puts a crimp in the whole top-down socialist thingie, doesn't it?

 

[Michelle420]

We are bound to the document. Lincoln and others challenged how to act within the boundaries of the document, but given the urgency and threats of civil war...you really should do some reading.

The preamble to the US Constitution tells us what it is for...


Blind obedience? you really need to grow up

We are not bound to anything as human beings, we are born into socially constructed civilizations that expect us to adhere to rules setup perhaps over 200 years ago that from the get go was hypocritical in that "we the people" were not allowed a chance to even vote on this constitution, only white men had that honor.

That doesn't necessarily mean it's not a worthy document to organize behind.

It's outdated imo and I resent the fact that only white males constructed it, I suspect bias.

Constitutionalists are like bible thumpers in the way they treat this document, it's as if people in the modern age are not allowed to question it.

 

[Michelle420]

Because we are a nation of laws and not men .. and we have a process to change what we want to. All you need to do is convince your fellow citizens of your brilliant and special gifts and we will follow your lead,,,,

We are not bound to the document and Lincoln was constitutionally disobedient in his timeline


What are Constitutions for ?

"The Constitution of the United States was a layman's document, not a lawyer's contract."

Since it was written over 200 years ago and during a time of slave labor that offered no representation for many folks in the minority I see no reason to blind obedience.

Does it never occur to you people that without the U.S. Constitution, the federal government has no authority over any of us? Doesn't even exist. We go back to being 50 separate States. Kind of puts a crimp in the whole top-down socialist thingie, doesn't it?

Not really I would move to California

 

[AVG-JOE]

Because we are a nation of laws and not men .. and we have a process to change what we want to. All you need to do is convince your fellow citizens of your brilliant and special gifts and we will follow your lead,,,,

We are not bound to the document and Lincoln was constitutionally disobedient in his timeline


What are Constitutions for ?

"The Constitution of the United States was a layman's document, not a lawyer's contract."

Since it was written over 200 years ago and during a time of slave labor that offered no representation for many folks in the minority I see no reason to blind obedience.

Does it never occur to you people that without the U.S. Constitution, the federal government has no authority over any of us? Doesn't even exist. We go back to being 50 separate States. Kind of puts a crimp in the whole top-down socialist thingie, doesn't it?

Well...

True, but it's not that simple. Whoever controls the military...

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

We are not bound to the document and Lincoln was constitutionally disobedient in his timeline


What are Constitutions for ?

"The Constitution of the United States was a layman's document, not a lawyer's contract."

Since it was written over 200 years ago and during a time of slave labor that offered no representation for many folks in the minority I see no reason to blind obedience.

We are bound to the document. Lincoln and others challenged how to act within the boundaries of the document, but given the urgency and threats of civil war...you really should do some reading.

The preamble to the US Constitution tells us what it is for...

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Blind obedience? you really need to grow up

We are not bound to anything as human beings, we are born into socially constructed civilizations that expect us to adhere to rules setup perhaps over 200 years ago that from the get go was hypocritical in that "we the people" were not allowed a chance to even vote on this constitution, only white men had that honor.

Is the US Constitution a flawed document? Of course and many of the framers and the 'people' who ratified it understood that. What would you have them do? It was an up or down vote, or stay with the Articles of Confederation.

You conveniently ignore, or gloss over the fact that people excluded are now included. We have a process to change it.

I have asked people for decades now "name me a dozen people you would trust to write a new constitution" -- no takers. It would of course take many more than a dozen. Trust the current Congress to do it?

The US Constitution was drafted behind closed doors with no official record kept of the deliberations, in order to allow members meeting to go back and forth and change minds as arguments were made and remade. Then the document was not given to the states to vote on, but to the people of the states to vote on through elected committee members separate from state government.

No government voted on what type of new government would rule the Americans. The 'people' of the states voted as a nation for the first time. They demanded a Bill of Rights as a condition of ratification, even though many of the framers argued they didn't need one, as rights were supposed to be self evident...

Part of the Bill of Rights allows for amendments to alter the document to fit the times, but it's a difficult process because they understood....human nature.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Because we are a nation of laws and not men .. and we have a process to change what we want to. All you need to do is convince your fellow citizens of your brilliant and special gifts and we will follow your lead,,,,

We are not bound to the document and Lincoln was constitutionally disobedient in his timeline


What are Constitutions for ?

"The Constitution of the United States was a layman's document, not a lawyer's contract."

Since it was written over 200 years ago and during a time of slave labor that offered no representation for many folks in the minority I see no reason to blind obedience.

Does it never occur to you people that without the U.S. Constitution, the federal government has no authority over any of us? Doesn't even exist. We go back to being 50 separate States. Kind of puts a crimp in the whole top-down socialist thingie, doesn't it?

No, we would have stayed with the Articles of Confederation and have ceased to exist as a nation in a relatively short period of time

 

[Michelle420]

Well...

True, but it's not that simple. Whoever controls the military...

I know it's not simple but we need a new one and scrap the old one, from the get go that old document had bias, slaves didn't have a voice, women were not allowed to vote.

Secondly, we ought to let our native americans have a voice in this whole thing dontcha think?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

We are not bound to the document and Lincoln was constitutionally disobedient in his timeline


What are Constitutions for ?

"The Constitution of the United States was a layman's document, not a lawyer's contract."

Since it was written over 200 years ago and during a time of slave labor that offered no representation for many folks in the minority I see no reason to blind obedience.

Does it never occur to you people that without the U.S. Constitution, the federal government has no authority over any of us? Doesn't even exist. We go back to being 50 separate States. Kind of puts a crimp in the whole top-down socialist thingie, doesn't it?

Not really I would move to California

there would have been no California

 

[skye]

To perform our bodily functions.

That's all Nature gives us..... what else? frankly?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

We are not bound to anything as human beings, we are born into socially constructed civilizations that expect us to adhere to rules setup perhaps over 200 years ago that from the get go was hypocritical in that "we the people" were not allowed a chance to even vote on this constitution, only white men had that honor.

That doesn't necessarily mean it's not a worthy document to organize behind.

It's outdated imo and I resent the fact that only white males constructed it, I suspect bias.

Constitutionalists are like bible thumpers in the way they treat this document, it's as if people in the modern age are not allowed to question it.

What is it you don't get? Your agenda is childish, immature. You truly need to experience life and learn more.

good luck