God Given Rights

The natural law rights are ideals that function well, or better than others, in given conditions.

People do not realize it, but up until 1830, the republic had a great deal of integrity with relation to the constitution.
It is only since the civil war that government has gone far astray.

 

What does the document say?

 

Disagree with what? The statement is that our rights are granted by our creator. Period, nothing about God.
It is lying religious fundamentalists who try to inject their religion where it is not welcome. If you want to believe in a magic man in the sky, then go ahead, but do not try to inject your fantasy into some place where it does not exist.

 

I couldn't give a flying (*)(*)(*)(*) what opinion a court has, frankly.

 

Ok, so, to clarify for everyone the case which is being referred to is Torcaso v. Watkins
367 U.S. 488 (1961). The Court DID NOT say athiesm was a religion. What was said was this:

In Justice Black's judgment, articulating the findings of the Court's unanimous decision, footnote 11 stated that "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others."
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/367/488/case.html

It doesnt take a legally trained mind (which I have) to point out that;

1. It makes no reference to atheism
2. You can be a theist or an atheist and be a secular humanist, so the description of secular humanism as a religion (which is false by today's definition) is mute.
3. This judgment is over 50 years old and this sentence has not been cited or endorsed by any Court since.

Thus, it is clear, not surprisingly, that TheResister is talking complete tripe. No surprise he couldnt just mention the case name.

 

To begin with, the Declaration of Independence uses a capital C in the word Creator to illustrate its significance. There are other aspects that were dealt with earlier in this thread.

 

Yeah... but it dont say no "God" anywhere, let alone god with a lower case G.

And failed to be compelling.

 

While you are entitled to your opinion, the facts refute what you're saying. You seemed to omit that the organization Freedom From Religion Foundation has attempted to use that very cite to prove that they are the equivalent to a religion. Again, asked and answered with links earlier in this thread.

 

What facts? Citing an opinion is not a fact lol

So? Who cares what they think? They are clearly wrong.

Citing an opinion is not citing a fact. You keep at it though LOL

The Supreme Court have NEVER said atheism is a religion. You were wrong. Deal with it. Live and learn.

 

This is the reason we don't have any discourse on the subject. YOU offer nothing but opinions. When faced with the FACT that atheist groups do see their non belief as the equivalent of religion you still have a problem with it. No sir, all I have done is to give you the facts. You simply cannot accept them.

 

I just cited and quoted the case you refused to even say the name of and YOUR rresponse is some random groups opinion. You're either the biggest hypocrite of all time, or something is seriously amis in your comprehension of your own demands - youre clearly doing the reverse of what you expect of others and ignore actual evidence presented to you.

No, you've given ONE group and you have not explained why they are correct.

Do i have to agree with a random atheist group you quote? Are you serious?

What facts? That some atheists have ignorant opinions and that you dont know how to read Supreme Court judgments?

So you are demanding I accept the opinion of atheists you quote as correct?

 

AS I said really a differnt debate.

 

Yes ideals that the US has NEVER adhered to at any time in its existence.

rubbish, you consider slavery as having "a great deal of integrity with relation to the constitution." when your constitution states "All men are created equal" .. seems that the black people of that era didn't see much of that "integrity with relation to the constitution", and neither did women.

 

I am not arguing about the existence of God.

God is our Creator.

If you want to argue the existence of God, that would be this thread:

Proof That God Exists

 

Why can't you admit the truth? It says Creator, not God. If they wanted to say God they would have. It is really sad when people feel so insignificant they have to try to usurp a false meaning to what is clearly written. The document says what it says, stop trying to insinuate it says something it does not.. Try to maintain at least a semblance of credibility and dignity.

 

God and Creator are not synonymous. If you believe in a magic man in the sky, then that is your own neurosis. The document says what it says, and it does not say God. Deal with it.

 

I'll respectfully disagree.

Too bad you can't disagree respectfully.

 

The purpose of a debate is to make a logical and provable argument, not to respect an illogical perspective.

 

Well I would have to say that God is referred to by many names, Creator is only one of many.

I don't understand how you could be unaware of this.

 

It is sad when people resort to trying to change the meaning of words to support their unsupportable position.

 

Just so we can end the B.S. and get on with the thread. Here is one quote:

"It becomes a people publicly to acknowledge the over-ruling hand of Divine Providence and their dependence upon the Supreme Being as their Creator and Merciful Preserver . . . and with becoming humility and sincere repentance to supplicate the pardon that we may obtain forgiveness through the merits and mediation of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."

Who said it?

Samuel Huntington, A Proclamation for a Day of Fasting, Prayer and Humiliation, March 9, 1791

A little about Huntington -

He was one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence. And according to one article:

"Mr. Huntington was elected to the General Assembly of Connecticut in 1764, and the next year he was chosen a member of the Council. In the various duties of official station he always maintained the entire confidence and esteem of his constituents.

He was appointed Associate Judge of the Superior Court in 1774; and in 1775 he was appointed one of the delegates from Connecticut, in the General Congress. The following year he had the glorious privilege of voting for, and signing, the Declaration of Independence. He was a member of the Congress nearly five consecutive years, and was esteemed as one of the most active men there. His integrity and patriotism were stern and unbending; and so conspicuous became his sound judgment and untiring industry, that in 1779 he was appointed President of Congress, then the highest office in the nation. At length his impaired health demanded his resignation of the office, yet it was with great reluctance that Congress consented to dispense with his services."

http://www.adherents.com/people/ph/Samuel_Huntington.html

YES THE TERMINOLOGY IN THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE WAS INTENDED TO BE PREDICATED UPON A GOD / CREATOR.

 

Completely incorrect. If they intended it to be God they would have written god. They didnt, for the very reason this was not their intention. Huntington's conception of the document is by no means definitive of its meaning, especially as he merely signed it and had no part to play in its development.

The progression of the construction of the document is key in this regard. It was a Committee of Five, of which Huntington was not a member, who developed the Declaration.

"The original version as written by Jefferson no longer exists but has been reconstructed from various copies that do exist as follows with regards to the topic:
We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . . 2
In the Adams copy, written, sometime between June 11 and June 28, in his own (J. Adams) handwriting we have the following:
We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in rights inherent and unalienables, among which are the preservation of life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; . . . 3
Sometime later, but before being submitted to Congress, the above was changed to the following:
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. . . .4"
http://candst.tripod.com/doitj.htm


Additionally, and perhaps more importantly, one must note that the source of law in the US IS NOT the Declaration but the Constitution. The Declaration of Independence is not the Constitution and it is in that document US law is sourced. Its opening words are: "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, 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."

As you can see, it is the people of the US that are invoked as the source of legitimacy of the new country - not a Creator and certainly not god. A good book on the subject is The Godless Constitution by Isaac Kramnick and R. Laurence Moore.

 

You just had a classic fail. Huntington proved you wrong and there you go with the attitude well, if this Committee did not say that then I got you on that Declaration ain't the Constitution.

Huntington proved that the term Creator and God are synonymous for the use of the language at the time.

As for the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution is only a codification of the Declaration of Independence. ALL of this is covered in earlier posts on this thread. You don't have an argument, sir. Adding insult to injury I'd bet that Isaac Kramnick and R. Laurence Moore never signed the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution. Yet, while condemning believers because they are mortal men, you expect us to accept those guys and I bet they put their pants on one leg at a time. They are just men with an opinion.

 

Sorry, I've rebutted your point. If you have nothing else to contribute, just say so.

Yet they never said God OR Creator in that. Instead it invokes the people of the US as its authority.

Unfortunately, Huntington's opinion looks pretty weak when one looks at the actual development of the Declaration and the fact it says Creator and NOT god.

 

I hate to break it to you but there is no god. God is a figment of your imagination. The earth itself is our creator. Everything comes from the earth and returns to it. There is no magic man in the sky, or a Santa Claus, or an Easter Bunny, grow up. Study a little biology. LOL LOL LOL