Militia question 1

[CFLarsen]

It meant "God" to some of them (John Adams, Roger Sherman, John Witherspoon) and "Nature" to others (Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin). They were each individual people with their own individual perspectives. This is just yet another example of the groupthink that leads you away from the skepticism you claim to embrace.

That is baloney. You cannot put whatever meaning you want into those documents.

Try again.

 

[CFLarsen]

And if we shake hands, smile, and say "hello," how would the mere presence of a gun on my hip turn this everyday exchange into "intimidation" so much that you have such a great fear (before I even made the statement you are making such a big deal about) that would require you to bodily search me?

I can assure you that you and I will not shake hands, smile and say "Hello" at TAM3.

 

[Jocko]

I can assure you that you and I will not shake hands, smile and say "Hello" at TAM3.

Sounds like someone's going to be ordering a lot of room service. See, guns can have a positive effect on society. Keeps the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ in their rooms, hiding under the desk.

BTW, Claus, I'm quite impressed. Not only can you see 230 years into the past to get the REAL STORY on the wording of our national charter documents, you can also look into the FUTURE and see Shane pistol-whipping you in the finest tradition of wild-west John Wayne Americanism. So when do you collect the million?

Again, I will pay cash money for any photograph of Claus's expression when he meets Shane. Name your price.

 

[Tony]

That is baloney. You cannot put whatever meaning you want into those documents.

That's exactly what you and the anti-gun crowd are doing.

 

[Ed]

I am very lost now. Suppose the words mean God in the Roman Catholic sense. What difference does that make?

 

[CFLarsen]

I am very lost now. Suppose the words mean God in the Roman Catholic sense. What difference does that make?

It would be highly amusing - if somewhat contradicting - if skeptics were to point to a supernatural being, when asked who endowed them their rights.

"Nature's God". "Creator".

That's about as clear as you can get...

 

[Tony]

It would be highly amusing - if somewhat contradicting - if skeptics were to point to a supernatural being, when asked who endowed them their rights.

Not nearly as amusing as a skeptic claiming his rights come from a group of politicians.

 

[Jocko]

Not nearly as amusing as a skeptic claiming his rights come from a group of politicians.

Which itself pales in comparison to the amusement found in a "skeptic" claiming OUR rights come from HIS politicians. Projected morality - or rather amorality - anyone?

Get bent, Claus. I hope they perform a body cavity search on you at customs in Vegas.

 

[Jocko]

It would be highly amusing - if somewhat contradicting - if skeptics were to point to a supernatural being, when asked who endowed them their rights.

"Nature's God". "Creator".

That's about as clear as you can get...

I called this as your hypothesis two pages ago. Why take this long to come out and say it?

Oh, yeah, you're a coward.

Who created you, Claus? Wherever he/it is, I''ll bet he/it is very ashamed of itself.

 

[shanek]

Obviously it pisses you off that he even owns one.

That's the ironic thing: I don't own a gun. I'd have to rent or borrow one.

 

[shanek]

That is baloney. You cannot put whatever meaning you want into those documents.

I'm telling you what the founders believed, Claus, which is what you asked. Stop whining.

The fact is, they didn't have one specific idea for a Creator, and another fact is, it doesn't matter. What's important is that our rights are neither granted by nor subject to any human authority.

 

[shanek]

"Nature's God". "Creator".

That's about as clear as you can get...

Claus, the document in question has a ton of compromises in it. It had to pass Congress unanimously. So there were a lot of appeasements made. References to God were inserted at the insistence of some delegates whose votes they needed. An entire paragraph on the evils of slavery was deleted to appease others. The important thing was, declare that we have rights, declare that we are independent. It wasn't the time to engage in a theological discussion, as much as Jefferson was wont to do.

 

[c0rbin]

What do you mean? It is a fact that the Founding Fathers had no idea that atoms existed. They had no idea that galaxies existed. Quantum Mechanics, nope.

Please explain why this is arrogance.

Also, please explain what the Founding Fathers meant by "Creator".

One does not need an understanding of galaxies to understand freedom.

As for the creator thing, I think I explained what I thought the founding fathers meant.

 

[c0rbin]

What do you base this on?

The fact that the FF built a country based on freedom-religion, speech, self-determination by force of arms if necessary.

It would help your case a great deal, if you would not invent opinions that I do not have.

Poor comma use. I have read your posts on this forum and others. You deride people for believing in things that cannot be proven scientifically. Face it, dude. You are a pompous a$$hole.

Very droll. Now, please address the points.

I have and so have many others. You don't like the answers because they do not fit into your agenda.

 

[Jocko]

One does not need an understanding of galaxies to understand freedom.

As for the creator thing, I think I explained what I thought the founding fathers meant.

Yes, but expect Claus to keep on asking until we get it "right."

 

[Ed]

It would be highly amusing - if somewhat contradicting - if skeptics were to point to a supernatural being, when asked who endowed them their rights.

"Nature's God". "Creator".

That's about as clear as you can get...

Come on, Claus, you are playing "gotcha" now. However the founders meant it the implication is the the rights are not from the Government. It is blindingly simple. Where do you get your rights from? Reading a translation od the Danish Constitution it appears that they are in fact granted by government.

 

[CFLarsen]

Come on, Claus, you are playing "gotcha" now. However the founders meant it the implication is the the rights are not from the Government.

That's not the point. Where did they come from?

"Nature's God". "Creator".

 

[Ed]

That's not the point. Where did they come from?

"Nature's God". "Creator".

Suppose you know. What does that do for us?

I mean, it is an interesting nuance with regard to formal written government documents of the 18th century. Beyond that what difference does it make? You can, I suppose, laugh at us for getting our rights from God but so what? I just don't get the point of discussing it.

 

[CFLarsen]

Suppose you know. What does that do for us?

"Us", as in USA? Nothing, I guess. It merely underlines why the country is becoming a religious nightmare.

"Us", as in skeptics? I would most definitely call that a problem.

 

[Ed]

"Us", as in USA? Nothing, I guess. It merely underlines why the country is becoming a religious nightmare.

"Us", as in skeptics? I would most definitely call that a problem.

That's overstated. In anyevent, I trust that you understand the right to bear arms a bit better now.