Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 207

Thread: "God Given"

  1. #1
    Regular Member Jakeus314's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    81

    "God Given"

    I don't want to piss people off, but does anyone really think our rights are "god" given?

    I personally think it makes rights advocates look a little nutty. It just seems like an unnecessary exaggeration. I don't wish to discuss religion, but perhaps it may be necessary.

    -jakeus

  2. #2
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    I don't want to piss people off, but does anyone really think our rights are "god" given?

    I personally think it makes rights advocates look a little nutty. It just seems like an unnecessary exaggeration. I don't wish to discuss religion, but perhaps it may be necessary.

    -jakeus
    Whether you believe in God or not, you must believe in the concept of good correct? Our founding fathers made sure to separate Gov. from Church because they had been oppressed by both in their time, both controlled by King George.

    They also held certain rights to be unalienable such as: free speech, right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, The right not to be forced to bear witness against ones self... And the right to bear arms to protect those rights from tyrants.

    See text below for history


    The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription

    IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

    The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

    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, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

    He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
    He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
    He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
    He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
    He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
    He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
    He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
    He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
    He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
    He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
    He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
    He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
    He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
    For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
    For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
    For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
    For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
    For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
    For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
    For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
    For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
    For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
    He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
    He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
    He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
    He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
    He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

    In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

    Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

    We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
    Last edited by FreeInAZ; 11-21-2012 at 01:51 AM.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  3. #3
    Regular Member Jakeus314's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    81

    "God Given"

    I'm clear on what is implied in the writings...

    "god given" just sounds like "god gave us these rights" to me.

    I see them as hard earned by brave and selfless individuals. Earned.


    -jakeus

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Suffolk Virginia
    Posts
    699

    Re: "God Given"

    Then said he unto them … he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. (Luke 22:36)

    Sent from my XT912 using Tapatalk 2

  5. #5
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    I'm clear on what is implied in the writings...

    "god given" just sounds like "god gave us these rights" to me.

    I see them as hard earned by brave and selfless individuals. Earned.


    -jakeus
    Humans (non Psychopaths) understand that to enslave, abuse, control other humans is wrong. Where we get this from is up to each of us to decide. But without it, we would not be able to choose to stand up for ourselves and our fellow humans. I think that is the underlying theme of "God given".
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  6. #6
    Regular Member david.ross's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    1,241
    Quote Originally Posted by FreeInAZ View Post
    Humans (non Psychopaths)
    I must correct you on this since I've a background in healthcare. Not all psychopaths are criminals, which is contrary to what hollywood depicts. Psychopaths are human too. Unless of course you'd like to believe what hollywood sells regarding guns too?

    I encourage you to learn the levels of psychopathy, some make great businessmen and I'm sure there are some grade A people who do own firearms too.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffberc...ke-great-ceos/
    Last edited by david.ross; 11-21-2012 at 02:14 AM.
    Gays are prominent members of firearm rights, we do more via the courts, don't like it? Leave.
    Religious bigots against same sex marriage are not different than white supremacists.
    I expel anti-gay people off my teams. Tolerance is key to team cohesion and team building.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    We've discussed at length here. Not a dedicated thread, but intra-thread discussions.

    Over the years I have learned a handy little analysis method that I offer for others. When you reach an unresolveable loggerheads, when two pieces of information seemed directly counter-opposed, look one step earlier or one step higher in the process. Almost always you'll find the thing that unbalances the problem and opens it to resolution.

    For example, God-given rights vs not-from-God. Impasse.

    So, look earlier. One place to look is why either side is being used. What's the point of arguing from either side? To persuade, of course.

    Thus, if you are trying to persuade a buncha religious zealots, why waste time arguing and explaining and persuading from an athiest's viewpoint? Just go directly to the God-given set of arguments and logics.

    Whereas, if you are trying to persuade an athiest, why build an impenetrable wall for yourself by bringing up God?

    Just realize that the God-given angle is a persuasion method, an argument, nothing more. If the person you are trying to persuade doesn't buy the God-given angle, go for the Natural Rights angle. Natural Rights are basically the same thing; just swap the word nature for God. God-given rights as approached by John Locke are discernable from nature and our natures.

    The whole point of the development of the line of thinking for God-given or Natural Rights was to expand the arguments for rights and shift the foundation onto something a little more solid and objective than the king's capriciousness. To argue over the source of rights is really just an internal argument or side argument about which method of persuasion we're going to use.

    ----------------------------

    Its too coincidental you brought this up this evening. I just wrapped up watching a documentary on the Tudors and Stuarts. A great big problem for these monarchs was the supremacy of the monarch over the church. As a quick history lesson, Henry VIII couldn't get papal approval to divorce his wife, something he desperately needed because she wasn't giving him a male heir. So, he broke with Rome. And, set himself up as the Supreme Head of the Church in England. Nifty little solution, except that in order to help make it stick he also had to re-assert the medieval doctrine that the king was chosen by God and was answerable only to God.

    We know that doctrine as divine right. Well, there was a buncha upset and turmoil in Henry's realm over his break with Rome. Plenty of clergy hated it. Thomas More lost his head over it. At Henry's death, his son Edward became king for a few years and continued his father's shift to Anglicanism. Edward got sick and died only a few years after ascending the throne.

    Next, Henry's eldest daughter Mary became queen. One little problem--she was Catholic. You could say virulently so. More turmoil as she shifted the country back to Catholism, angering all the Protestants, and making some Catholics happy to have revenge for their sufferings under Henry and Edward. After about eleven or twelve years, Mary got sick and died.

    Then, Henry's younger daughter Elizabeth became queen. One little problem--she was Protestant. She shifted the country back to Anglicanism. More turmoil. She tried to steer a middle path that would satisfy all but the extremists on each side. This was a fine idea, except the extremists on both sides were not content and one or both forced her hand. Among other things she re-asserted her supremacy on religious matters as chosen by God. Chosen by God and answerable to no one but God. Meaning, she didn't have to explain herself or answer to the extremists.

    When Elizabeth died, James IV of Scotland came over to become James I of England. I'll leave out his religious troubles. Its kinda complicated.

    His son, Charles I, was incompetent and bossy. Caused a lot of problems. He was too stupid to yield when he needed to. Oliver Cromwell & Co. really only wanted him to make concessions. He wouldn't. When Charles fomented a second civil war from his prison cell, Cromwell & Co. decided enough was enough. They cut off his head. What do you suppose was one of Charles' arguments? Yep. You guessed it. Chosen by God. Answerable to no one. Divine right. Except he wasn't doing it to get out from under the pope or establish religious supremacy. He was saying it for political supremacy.

    End of history lesson. Back to God-given rights.

    So, I was thinking about all this just this evening, and it occured to me that it is too easy an argument when a legal positivist (rights and law come from man) starts mouthing off against the idea of Natural Rights or God-given Rights. Just look him in the eye and accuse him of returning us to the day when kings claimed supremacy because of divine right. Huh? Yeah, we spent about 500 years trying to get rights away from men (kings) who abused/misused the concept of God by claiming divine right and putting it onto an objective source; and, now you want to turn it back to men again. Thanks a lot, bucko.
    Last edited by Citizen; 11-21-2012 at 03:12 AM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by david.ross View Post
    I must correct you on this since I've a background in healthcare. Not all psychopaths are criminals, which is contrary to what hollywood depicts. Psychopaths are human too. Unless of course you'd like to believe what hollywood sells regarding guns too?

    I encourage you to learn the levels of psychopathy, some make great businessmen and I'm sure there are some grade A people who do own firearms too.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffberc...ke-great-ceos/

    Am I the only one who doesn't see a correction here?

    FreeinAZ didn't say anything about criminals, so I don't understand the reference in the quote above about criminals.

    I even looked up the definition of psychopath to make sure I had it right. Once you get around all the psuedo-scientific mumbo jumbo and inability to define the condition, you can sorta distill out from what's left that AZ in fact was using the term correctly. As correct as a bunch of fraudsters like psych's can be anyway.

    So, I don't see a correction in the quote just above. Nor, do I see an error in FreeinAZ's reference to psychopaths.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    I don't want to piss people off, but does anyone really think our rights are "god" given?

    I personally think it makes rights advocates look a little nutty. It just seems like an unnecessary exaggeration. I don't wish to discuss religion, but perhaps it may be necessary.

    -jakeus
    God given or "natural rights" .. hardly a true religious debate ... see US 9th amendment for your answer

  10. #10
    Regular Member david.ross's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    1,241
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Am I the only one who doesn't see a correction here?
    Yes, it's just you.

    I'm referring to his "(non psychopaths)" section, as if people who are "psychopaths" are not human. I know exactly what people think when they say such things.

    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I even looked up the definition of psychopath to make sure I had it right.
    Correct. The DSM doesn't have a definition for "psychopathy".
    Last edited by david.ross; 11-21-2012 at 03:26 AM.
    Gays are prominent members of firearm rights, we do more via the courts, don't like it? Leave.
    Religious bigots against same sex marriage are not different than white supremacists.
    I expel anti-gay people off my teams. Tolerance is key to team cohesion and team building.

  11. #11
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by david.ross View Post
    Yes, it's just you.

    I'm referring to his "(non psychopaths)" section, as if people who are "psychopaths" are not human. I know exactly what people think when they say such things.
    Since you seem to think you know what I was thinking, let me correct you. I was referring to those with "shallow or lacking in feelings for others" in layman's terms that is. Or from one of the many definitions online http://www.psychologytoday.com/basic...thyPsychopathy is among the most difficult disorders to spot. The psychopath can appear normal, even charming. Underneath, they lack conscience and empathy, ...

    I know you have a PhD or higher, but until you can pick the winning lotto numbers, please do not attempt to tell me what I am thinking.
    Last edited by FreeInAZ; 11-21-2012 at 03:28 AM.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by david.ross View Post
    Yes, it's just you.

    I'm referring to his "(non psychopaths)" section, as if people who are "psychopaths" are not human. I know exactly what people think when they say such things.



    Correct. The DSM doesn't have a definition for "psychopathy".
    So, why did your correction address criminals when he didn't say anything about criminals? Don't bother. That's a rhetorical question. I know you were reading something into it that wasn't there.

    Furthermore, he didn't say or even imply that psychopaths were nonhuman. He said humans and excluded the subset that is psychopathic.

    And, just exactly how many people do you think really think psychopaths are not human? I mean really? If someone said "that man is a dog", would you feel the need to correct him? Supposing in your own mind that he really thought the man was dog?

    Give me a break.
    Last edited by Citizen; 11-21-2012 at 04:39 AM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  13. #13
    Michigan Moderator Big Gay Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mason, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,954
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    I'm clear on what is implied in the writings...

    "god given" just sounds like "god gave us these rights" to me.

    I see them as hard earned by brave and selfless individuals. Earned.


    -jakeus
    As it has already been pointed out, certain rights are either "God Given" or they are simply "Natural." In other words, we are "Endowed with certain inalienable rights." Among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of as many guns as I can afford to buy. While I'll concede there are some rights that do have to be earned. The right of self defense (and the tools necessary to carry out that self defense) is a natural right.

    And if you disagree with me on that, I'll hit you with my purse!
    Big Gay Al
    Coordinator, Michigan Pink Pistols
    Big Gay Al's Big Gay (Gun) Blog
    Fabrique Nationale d'Herstal FNX-45 .45ACP 16 rounds of hurt.

  14. #14
    Michigan Moderator Big Gay Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mason, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,954
    And, just out of decorum, can we not have an argument on psychopathy? It's not relevant to this discussion.

    Big Gay Al
    Coordinator, Michigan Pink Pistols
    Big Gay Al's Big Gay (Gun) Blog
    Fabrique Nationale d'Herstal FNX-45 .45ACP 16 rounds of hurt.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    I'm clear on what is implied in the writings...

    "god given" just sounds like "god gave us these rights" to me.

    I see them as hard earned by brave and selfless individuals. Earned.


    -jakeus
    Well... this thread is already interesting... but I'll give my extremely simplistic understanding of "rights".

    Each and every living thing, simply because it lives, has the right to try to keep on living. After all.. what is the point of life if one is dead? Hence the right to self defense. Many creatures have built in weapons like claws and teeth but human's have a much better weapon... their brain .. that allows them to create their own version of "claws and teeth".

    God given? Natural? Earned? The word used to describe the desire to not be dead doesn't matter... what matters is just because we are alive we have the right to try to stay that way.

    As far as getting into Who created life and who gives life? To me (my opinion) that delves into personal beliefs and still really doesn't matter since.... regardless of Who, if anyone/anything, gave us life there is still the right to try to protect that life so as not to be dead.

    And all the other rights that humans have stem from that one simple right to try to stay alive since if a person is not alive the entire concept of rights is... moot.

    My two cents worth (lemme factor in inflation) .. umm... next to nothing.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  16. #16
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    Well... this thread is already interesting... but I'll give my extremely simplistic understanding of "rights".

    Each and every living thing, simply because it lives, has the right to try to keep on living. After all.. what is the point of life if one is dead? Hence the right to self defense. Many creatures have built in weapons like claws and teeth but human's have a much better weapon... their brain .. that allows them to create their own version of "claws and teeth".

    God given? Natural? Earned? The word used to describe the desire to not be dead doesn't matter... what matters is just because we are alive we have the right to try to stay that way.

    As far as getting into Who created life and who gives life? To me (my opinion) that delves into personal beliefs and still really doesn't matter since.... regardless of Who, if anyone/anything, gave us life there is still the right to try to protect that life so as not to be dead.

    And all the other rights that humans have stem from that one simple right to try to stay alive since if a person is not alive the entire concept of rights is... moot.

    My two cents worth (lemme factor in inflation) .. umm... next to nothing.
    Well, from an evolutionary perspective, the purpose of life is to reproduce one's self. That is, live long enough to create off-springs. I have, so my task is done. Goodbye........
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    So, I was thinking about all this just this evening, and it occured to me that it is too easy an argument when a legal positivist (rights and law come from man) starts mouthing off against the idea of Natural Rights or God-given Rights. Just look him in the eye and accuse him of returning us to the day when kings claimed supremacy because of divine right. Huh? Yeah, we spent about 500 years trying to get rights away from men (kings) who abused/misused the concept of God by claiming divine right and putting it onto an objective source; and, now you want to turn it back to men again. Thanks a lot, bucko.

    Good post, all of it just quoting your well put conclusion for emphasis.

    I have been reading Conceived in Liberty , by Rothbard, much of the history you mentioned had a lot of effect on the colonies too in ways I wouldn't have expected. Liberties grew and waned and were very much effected by those in power a continent away. Libertarian minded colonies often were compelled to comprise liberties in different ways even when "liberal" rulers were in power in England.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  18. #18
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    I don't want to piss people off, but does anyone really think our rights are "god" given?

    I personally think it makes rights advocates look a little nutty. It just seems like an unnecessary exaggeration. I don't wish to discuss religion, but perhaps it may be necessary.

    -jakeus
    God is the word and the word is the law.

    It's referring to a natural right. A right of natural law. The right is granted simply by our state of self awareness and our ability to think.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  19. #19
    Regular Member hjmoosejaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N.W. Pa.
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by mpguy View Post
    Then said he unto them … he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. (Luke 22:36)

    Sent from my XT912 using Tapatalk 2
    This is the one I was trying to remember. There are other quotes also. This one, along with the replies between here and your OP, I think, is pretty much all one needs. There are a few answers there that just put it as basic and true as it could get. Have a good one!
    watch your top knot !

  20. #20
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    I don't want to piss people off, but does anyone really think our rights are "god" given?

    I personally think it makes rights advocates look a little nutty. It just seems like an unnecessary exaggeration. I don't wish to discuss religion, but perhaps it may be necessary.

    -jakeus
    Well Jake, let's do it this way. There is no God, so rights are not god given, so gooberment has no reason to honor them, since they are not god given and we are just animals. Why fuss over something that would make keeping our rights harder, whether you believe or not.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    Well Jake, let's do it this way. There is no God, so rights are not god given, so gooberment has no reason to honor them, since they are not god given and we are just animals. Why fuss over something that would make keeping our rights harder, whether you believe or not.
    Op-
    Wolf is hitting on an important point. One of the most important reasons to keep believers of GOD in government is to keep the belief of our founding fathers. Once all belief in God is gone in government there is no HIGHER god than the government. This means our rights can be dictated by the whims on men that don't have our BEST interest at heart.

    We already seen that since the attack on prayer & public displays of Christianity began, our country has gone into a downward spiral and corruption greatly increase in our government. When the government can dictate "religion" (Pro or Con) and religious rights of believers, they can dictate any secular right as well. We need believers & Unbelievers alike to stand up for ALL rights.

    I am a believer & a minister that opposes what the Bible speaks of as sin. But IMHO, it is not the job of government to dictate what goes on in the privacy of someones bedroom. I also believe it is the governments job to do what it can to protect life. Therefore, I think abortion should be more regulated and allowed only is cases rape, incest & health of the mother. But, as for other "religious" opinions & beliefs, as long as they don't interfere with others rights, they should be left OUT of government rule.

    Lastly, giving a shout out to Big Gay Al & Bikenut-

    -
    Last edited by tcox4freedom; 11-21-2012 at 11:35 AM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Jakeus314's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    81

    "God Given"

    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    and, now you want to turn it back to men again.
    I don't think I understand what you mean by this. If kings claim divine right how is it different from us claiming divine right?


    -jakeus

  23. #23
    Regular Member Jakeus314's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    81

    "God Given"

    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    Well Jake, let's do it this way. There is no God, so rights are not god given, so gooberment has no reason to honor them, since they are not god given and we are just animals. Why fuss over something that would make keeping our rights harder, whether you believe or not.
    How about this. I don't know if there is a God. We are exceptional animals. Many people died establishing and preserving our Constitution. Our government is based on that constitution.

    How does this make keeping our rights harder?


    -jakeus

  24. #24
    Regular Member Jakeus314's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    81

    "God Given"

    Quote Originally Posted by tcox4freedom View Post
    Op-
    Wolf is hitting on an important point. One of the most important reasons to keep believers of GOD in government is to keep the belief of our founding fathers. Once all belief in God is gone in government there is no HIGHER god than the government. This means our rights can be dictated by the whims on men that don't have our BEST interest at heart.

    We already seen that since the attack on prayer & public displays of Christianity began, our country has gone into a downward spiral and corruption greatly increase in our government. When the government can dictate "religion" (Pro or Con) and religious rights of believers, they can dictate any secular right as well. We need believers & Unbelievers alike to stand up for ALL rights.

    I am a believer & a minister that opposes what the Bible speaks of as sin. But IMHO, it is not the job of government to dictate what goes on in the privacy of someones bedroom. I also believe it is the governments job to do what it can to protect life. Therefore, I think abortion should be more regulated and allowed only is cases rape, incest & health of the mother. But, as for other "religious" opinions & beliefs, as long as they don't interfere with others rights, they should be left OUT of government rule.

    Lastly, giving a shout out to Big Gay Al & Bikenut-

    -
    The PEOPLE are the higher god that government should be worshiping.


    -jakeus

  25. #25
    Regular Member detroit_fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Monroe, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by mpguy View Post
    Then said he unto them … he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. (Luke 22:36)

    Sent from my XT912 using Tapatalk 2
    see, this is the type of stuff that really bothers me about this site. that is your personal religious view, many of us do not believe in that and I don't think quoting scripture should be allowed on OCDO. take it to a religious forum if you want to write that stuff.
    If guns cause crime, all mine are defective- Ted Nugent

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •