Passenger killed by air marshall

Jocko said:
Claus, let me just go on the record as saying that bandying insults about how you choose to pound your pud is infinitely more entertaining that watching you try (and fail) once again to convince anyone that the US Constitution is invalid because you just don't understand it.

Oh, speaking of words, how does one "practice a meaning"? Is that some kind of weird Danish euphamism for "poking Polonius through the tapestry"?
Click to expand...

I am not particularly interested in your extracurricular activities.
 
Skeptic said:
No, they are not. The state recognizes certain rights, but rights belong to the people due to them being humans. This has been the case at least since the Magna Carta.

The US declaration of independence says that "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and endowed by their creator with certain inalianable rights, among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

That is, the creator gave people rights which include these three, not the government giving them only those rights.

This is crucial, since it makes the state (whomever really "gives" those rights to men, a creator or anything else, such as their human nature) only the protector of rights not belonging to it, not the grantor of those rights. For what the states gives, it can also take; but it cannot legitimately take away the rights of the people if it is only its protector.
Click to expand...

According to the Declaration of Independence, rights do not belong to humans simply because they are humans. They are, as you correctly state, endowed by their Creator.

Who is this creator, if not God?
 
CFLarsen said:
According to the Declaration of Independence, rights do not belong to humans simply because they are humans. They are, as you correctly state, endowed by their Creator.

Who is this creator, if not God?
Click to expand...

The God a god, which god we talking about here?
 
Jocko said:
Or, at the risk of apparing pedantic, the rights of the "fellow men" are aggressively asserted... all depends on which end of the bomb threat you're on.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sorta like one of them hyperbolic function thingies
 
Tony said:
Ahh, now "resisting arrest" and "reaching into your jacket" are crimes punishable by death. It's amazing how much people want the US to be like fundy muslim countries.
Click to expand...

That is beyond straw, it is almost a creeping grassland plant of some sort.
 
CFLarsen said:
According to the Declaration of Independence, rights do not belong to humans simply because they are humans. They are, as you correctly state, endowed by their Creator.

Who is this creator, if not God?
Click to expand...


keyword here = "their"

It's "their" creator, the one they choose to believe in or not.
 
CFLarsen said:
A supernatural one.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's called "Nature's God" in the Declaration of Independence, so unless you're theorizing that nature itself is supernatural, maybe you ought to reconsider.

But since this has already been pointed out to you several times before, I fully expect you to ignore it yet again.

Did you know that Hamlet displayed significant Oedipal tendencies? It's true.
 
Jocko said:
Actually, it's called "Nature's God" in the Declaration of Independence, so unless you're theorizing that nature itself is supernatural, maybe you ought to reconsider.
Click to expand...

Key word is "God". Not "Nature".

Jocko said:
Did you know that Hamlet displayed significant Oedipal tendencies? It's true.
Click to expand...

T'is not wiseth to lecture a Dane on Hamlet.
 
CFLarsen said:
Makes no difference. The point is that the rights are given by a supernatural force.

What god isn't supernatural?
Click to expand...

It could be a scientist or a programmer or some such. It could be nature itself, it could be a stick. I don't know, since the Decloration of Independece does not specify I just don't know; I thought you might know since you are asking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom