Rights Are God-Given

When I brought up "self delusion" you whined strawman. Now you are conceding a "useful fairy tale". Make up your mind.

 

But God-given rights only work in the way you describe if they’re unquestionably given by God. If they’re only given by people claiming to speak for God (even if we all accepted that god exists), those rights are effectively no better than if those people just made them up (after all, we wouldn’t be able to definitively tell the difference).

Yes, but you were making a distinction between Europeans doing the bad things and Christians speaking against them. I’m suggesting that reality is more fuzzy and that Christians and churches weren’t really that distinct from people in general so should share equally in both the good and bad of those periods in history.

And that’s a fine principle but it is you saying it, not God. You’ve not removed the problems of the man-made rights in that we have to agree which rights are “god given” and even if we could, they would remain subject to debate and change.

 

I agree with the highlighted part. . . . The rest is irrelevant to the OP.

 

the topic is rights are god given. You keep whining when people want to challenge that. It seems like a silly thing to whine about, given the title of the OP and the concept of rights in general.

 

"God"?

"God" who?

 

I view LEGITIMATE rights as allowances that cannot be challenged by moral perspectives. . . . Whether they are respected or taken away, they are still rights.

The religious concept of "free will" refutes the argument of "God-given", but I think it could more correctly called "God-sanctioned".

 

So you don't even believe in the UN's declaration of human rights? I consider some of them a bit silly but the idea that there are rights intrinsic in the person I do not find silly at all.

 

No. All rights are man man concepts. You only have the rights society agrees you have, or the rights you can defend.

 

We don't know what they meant. But one thing is certain, if they meant 'God', they would've said God. But they said creator, which makes it open ended and each person has their own creator or each religion has their own creator.

 

We can believe in that declaration, but that is a man made declaration. And all should abide by it for it to be considered human rights. Until then, only those that abide by it can call them human rights afforded to all. Unless the UN wants to, by force, make all people abide by it.
Which means 'might makes right'. The true only natural human right.

 

To the contrary ... the rest of the post addresses where the founders got their concept of rights from.

 

The concept of rights was brought up in the Declaration of Independence.

 

Correct - individual rights and freedoms were put "above" the legitimate authority of Gov't and 2) authority of Gov't comes from "we the people" rather than divine right/God as was the case in the past.

My post dealt with where these ideas came from.

 

Your post contradicts itself. . . . Furthermore, "rights" have nothing to do with government. . . . They are allowances that cannot be challenged by moral perspectives. They may, however, be DEFENDED by laws.

 

Look Pal .. if you are going to cry "contradiction" then state what that contradiction is.

2) Rights have a whole lot to do with Government ... (it is abject nonsense to claim otherwise in any realistic sense). Gov't can take your rights away. You can claim "I have natural rights" all you like but if no one respects those rights ... what good are they ?

 

individual rights and freedoms were put "above" the legitimate authority of Gov't and 2) authority of Gov't comes from "we the people" rather than divine right/God as was the case in the past.

First you say that rights were above the scope of government control. . . . Then you say that government now has control of rights. . . . YOU CAN'T REDEFINE RIGHTS.

Government can VIOLATE rights, but they can't take them away. . . . It is up to GOOD government to defend these rights.

 

Troianii,
to resolve the confusion of whether or not God exists is simple; God is Man and Mankind, always has been and always will be. The statement also resolves the issue of Rights; Yes Rights are God-given because we give ourselves Rights. Some of those rights are none consequential, but the premise still stands that we give ourselves rights.
The only Rights that we give ourselves that matter in my mind are those rights that reaffirm: knowledge, wisdom, understanding, culture, and refinement; civilization.

To address the historical issue, yes the RCC did say that natives are human but their view was based upon religious conversion or forcing others to accept their concepts of who and what God is. The entire behavioral history of Europeans, the RCC, and many others, has nothing to do with God, per se, nor the recognition of the natural rights of others, but of domination. I could also delve into the many who have labeled themselves Muslim and what they practice as Islam in detail, but suffice it to say that they too have not actually practiced Islam.

 

So you don't believe that you have a right to live? To defend yourself?
You think if society says it is illegal to raise a hand in your defense that that is somehow intrinsically valid?
Why, because might makes right?
Is that truly what you believe?

 

Might makes right? That is the depth of your consideration for the intrinsic value of a human being? Whosoever swings the biggest stick does whatever they should like and all must smile and ask for lubricant?

Damn liberals, you scary.

 

I think I do. But that's irrelevant. I have those things, because we live in a civilized society, which has agreed people should have certain rights.

it's as valid as every other law.

yes

it's not a matter of belief. It's a demonstrable fact of reality.

 

Free Will has to do with natural rights. It is the right of men and mankind to express their will freely and if said person or people intrude upon any’s natural rights, it is the obligation and duty of those who have been wronged, to have those wrong redressed by the offender(s).This truth was known to the Founders of this nation and is recognized in the Torah, Injil and Holy Qur’an. The concept of rights is nothing more than the recognition that in the interactions of man and mankind, there has to be rules of engagement for the purposes of peace, tranquility and civilization

 

If it can be changed, it is not a law. Laws are permanent.

 

You can claim every right you think you have in the world and more.
If one shoots you dead, all your rights mean squat.

If you own land, and one moves in and kicks you out. You own land no more.

 

Death and taxes are the only permanent things.

 

So you think you have rights intrinsic to your being, but you think rights don't exist unless you can strongarm them by self or by proxy?
You folk really twist yourselves into knots. I haven't seen such mental gymnastics since John Roberts opinion on Obamacare.