Another right may bite the dust

[Lueyen]

As far as Tikker backing you up, keep in mind that the general base concepts on which the United States was founded are foreign to him (yes pun intended), he doesn't get that our rights are not granted by government but ordained by our creator.

I disagree with this logic on a pretty large scale, and kind of get sick of reading it so often from so many people

just because someone resides in another country doesn't mean they don't know or can't learn just as much about our country as we do. We learn it from history books and reading just like anyone else, and I, personally, think it's pretty ignorant to assume that just because you're foreign it means you're incapable of knowing what the states laws are.

I didn't pull that out of thin air or base it on his country of origin, in previous discussions Tikker has demonstrated by what he said that he doesn't view rights as being inherent, but as being granted by government.

[Gypsiyee]

well.. I guess Im not 100% clear on what you're trying to say, but it sounds like you're implying that God gives us the right to bear arms? I mean thats what you're saying when you say our 'creator' yeah?

call me a retard if I'm wrong, but that's what I'm interpreting.

[brinstar]

lol "creator"

okay

[Arlos]

And on the 8th day, god said let there be high-velocity jacketed 7.62mm?

-Arlos

[Harrison]

Well, down to the basics anything we're not allowed to do is simply a rule put in place by men.

Believe in God or Gods or not, the base point is still valid.

This applies to everything. I personally don't believe the government should be telling us jackshit on what we can and cannot do in regards to ourselves.

[Lueyen]

well.. I guess Im not 100% clear on what you're trying to say, but it sounds like you're implying that God gives us the right to bear arms? I mean thats what you're saying when you say our 'creator' yeah?

call me a retard if I'm wrong, but that's what I'm interpreting.

The short answer is yes, although creator doesn't have to mean God, it can just as easily mean nature, Cthulhu or whatever floats your boat. The intent behind using the subjective word "Creator" is to make perfectly clear that above all else our rights are not given or granted by people or by extension government. I can not however take credit for the idea behind using the word creator so as to make it religiously neutral and still make a reference to a higher power then mankind (or by extension government) clear, as I certainly wasn't the one to come up with the idea. I took the idea from a document written by much wiser men than myself a little over 2 centuries ago.

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

- The United States Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

[Tikker]

oh i fully understand that you've signed over your rights to free thought, and allow your church of the invisible man to dictate your outlook.

You believe in your invisible man so deeply you KNOW that everyone else is wrong!

read my sig, it applies 100% to people like you

[Eziekial]

Read the Declaration of Independence. It's the reason for this entire discussion and spells it out for everyone.

[Gaazy]

I love how high up on a pedastal most people that are atheists or whatever put themselves. I know a LOT of Christians do the same thing, but atheists are the worst with that "Ha! I know the truth! Tahaha! I WWIN!!!!!!! You believe in an invisible man! Hahah! Stupd!!!!"

[Tikker]

I love how high up on a pedastal most people that are religious or whatever put themselves. I know a LOT of athiests do the same thing, but christians are the worst with that "Ha! I know the truth! Tahaha! I WWIN!!!!!!! I believe in an invisible man! Hahah! Stupd!!!!"

[Gypsiyee]

I didn't know the creator invented guns and the right to use them

your arguments are usually pretty well mapped out and factual, but you're sitting here saying that god came down and said, when man invented guns, that all americans have the right to tote them around? honestly at this point you just sound like a crazy person. that's one hell of an interpretation.

[Gaazy]

Maybe it could be switched around tik, either way, both are bad about it, and it gets fucking annoying from both sides. Just to me, in my opinion, atheists hold theirnoses a little higher most of the time about it

Me, personally, I dont give a shit what anyone is. I guess you could call me a christian, but I dont go to church hardly or anything like that. I decided a long time ago that I was just going to live a good life, try to treat others like I want to be treated, work hard for what Ive got, and dont lie, cheat, or steal. If thats not enough to get me into heaven, oh well, I had a good life

[Lueyen]

oh i fully understand that you've signed over your rights to free thought, and allow your church of the invisible man to dictate your outlook.

You believe in your invisible man so deeply you KNOW that everyone else is wrong!

read my sig, it applies 100% to people like you

I didn't know the creator invented guns and the right to use them

your arguments are usually pretty well mapped out and factual, but you're sitting here saying that god came down and said, when man invented guns, that all americans have the right to tote them around? honestly at this point you just sound like a crazy person. that's one hell of an interpretation.

Well that takes the cake. Instead of trying to logically refute any of the points I've made, people have descended into painting me as a brain washed zealot that believes the root of all this is based in divine intervention. My argument has nothing to do with religion or religious beliefs. It has to do with what the founders of this country stated. If my interpretation is so completely inaccurate then how come no one has articulated an argument as to where I am in error and what the correct interpretation is? I have to hand it to ClakarEQ for at least trying to do so early on, yet he too turned to exclusively personal attacks instead of offering something to refute the basis for my so called interpretations.

Religion and or the belief in the divine has not one iota to do with any of this, my only point that is even closely related was that our founding fathers believed that rights were not granted to us by government but by a higher power. Again I'll state that the word creator can mean virtually anything you want it to mean, and the point being made remains un-changed. Even from a purely atheistic view could we not at least say that your parents are your creator? It matters not who or what you view as your creator, regardless our founding fathers viewed it as obvious that rights were not granted or given by government, but are inherent.

I reference "creator" as used by the drafters of the Declaration of Independence, Brinstar laughs at it, Tikker goes on an anti-religion tirade, and Gypsiyee and Arlos exaggerate what I've stated to a level of absurdity... and I'm the close minded crackpot?

There is at least one fairly good counter argument I can see to the points I've made, and frankly it would be a very interesting discussion. I'll be damned however if I'm going to throw it out there for people to chew on, when the interest in a decent discussion hasn't really manifested it's self.

[Tikker]

there's no point trying to argue with someone who believes in god

logic + faith don't much mix

[brinstar]

the interest in a decent discussion hasn't really manifested it's self.

i agree

now please feel free to stop posting at any time

[Harrison]

there's no point trying to argue with someone who believes in god

logic + faith don't much mix

There's no point in trying to argue with someone who thinks they have the answer to an unanswerable question.

You're just as fucking stupid as you believe people with a religion are.

[Gypsiyee]

I reference "creator" as used by the drafters of the Declaration of Independence, Brinstar laughs at it, Tikker goes on an anti-religion tirade, and Gypsiyee and Arlos exaggerate what I've stated to a level of absurdity... and I'm the close minded crackpot?

please note that the only thing I've said anything about is the absurd notion that some mythical being created the right to use guns. my question directly asked:

but it sounds like you're implying that God gives us the right to bear arms?

you replied short answer is yes, though you justified that it wasn't necessarily god but whoever we believed in. my response was solely based on that, because it is an absolute lunatic statement to me. My question wasn't anything to do with what if I don't believe in your God. my question was if you actually believe that someone, anyone, any higher power that we can't see feel or touch who existed before man, before guns, gave us the right to tote them around, and you said yes. I didn't pick apart anything else you said, my ENTIRE response was based on your answer that God indeed gave us the right to bear arms.

[Narrock]

logic + faith don't much mix

As long as you exclude Judaism and Christianity from that, I would agree with you.

[Tikker]

religion is religion

[brinstar]

logic + faith don't much mix

As long as you exclude Judaism and Christianity from that, I would agree with you.

hahahaha

and what, pray tell, is logical about either judaism or christianity

[Lueyen]

I reference "creator" as used by the drafters of the Declaration of Independence, Brinstar laughs at it, Tikker goes on an anti-religion tirade, and Gypsiyee and Arlos exaggerate what I've stated to a level of absurdity... and I'm the close minded crackpot?

please note that the only thing I've said anything about is the absurd notion that some mythical being created the right to use guns. my question directly asked:

but it sounds like you're implying that God gives us the right to bear arms?

you replied short answer is yes, though you justified that it wasn't necessarily god but whoever we believed in. my response was solely based on that, because it is an absolute lunatic statement to me. My question wasn't anything to do with what if I don't believe in your God. my question was if you actually believe that someone, anyone, any higher power that we can't see feel or touch who existed before man, before guns, gave us the right to tote them around, and you said yes. I didn't pick apart anything else you said, my ENTIRE response was based on your answer that God indeed gave us the right to bear arms.

I did not take issue with your first question/statement on the matter, it was when you started talking about "creator invented guns" and "but you're sitting here saying that god came down and said". I did not say anything about divine inspiration or intervention. There is a far cry difference between believing that human beings having free will and being self aware have innate rights that are not granted by any social political structure, and some deity directly decreeing such. One thing I am curious about Gypsiyee is if you think the concept is lunatic only in application to firearms or in general?

Narrock one of the main aspects of faith is that you believe something you can not prove, and I would submit to you that if matters you take on faith could be absolutely logically proven then it really not faith at all, just evident fact. Tikker is right in stating logic and faith do not mix, because with one there is no need for the other. This is not to say that categorically faith is illogical, although it can be if absolute proof is evident to refute it.

[Gypsiyee]

One thing I am curious about Gypsiyee is if you think the concept is lunatic only in application to firearms or in general?

In general, actually. Regardless of what religious men wrote, it was man who granted those rights (via binding text, not figuratively) and man who can take them away. This is why these rights are not a constant in all countries - if it was a higher power that granted us the right to be free, I'd be curious to hear why you feel that right is exclusive to just a fraction of the world.

[Evermore]

logic + faith don't much mix

As long as you exclude Judaism and Christianity from that, I would agree with you.

I have to agree with Tikk on this one. Logic and Religion don't mix and in some things are inherently opposite

[ClakarEQ]

Lue I wouldn't say I "personally attacked you", I suck at flaming as it is so to say I attacked you is a bit far fetched.

The whole point of what I was trying to say, summed up ok by Tikker, was regarding "new" information to me about the article I posted, then a continued discussion of how I'm of the opinion that over time, the 2nd will be spun against the reason it was written, that's it, plain and simple. Over time many important documents, laws, books, etc all get "re-understood" as to what the intent actually was, the bill of rights and our constitution are no exception and in allot of ways it has already begun. No governing body in all of recorded humanity has lasted forever, to think ours will is simply foolish.

Folks say our federal gun laws are against the law but it doesn't stop the law from putting you behind bars if you break a "legal" law.

I'm ok to disagree, I wasn't trying to change minds but as usual open them up to opinions and directions that do not agree with many.

[Minrott]

Basic human rights are not granted by men. They may be taken away by men, they may be defended by men, but they are not granted by them.

The right to defend yourself and your people is the most basic of those human rights. Most people know this, deep down. While the taking away of said right may not in itself warrant a fight or flight response in most people is irrelevant. The taking away of this right is by like minded people here who assume they are trading something useless to them for a guise of safety and protection. Rather than choosing to be responsible for themselves, and that others will do the same, they grant a central power the ability to determine what is their right, and what is not. Time and time again, in one civilization after another, people make this choice to alleviate their responsibility of themselves. Time and time again, it backfires on them.

The argument that "the creator" endowed us with these rights is a correct one. Whether there is a creator or not, is not the point. The point is that as a human being, you are born with certain inalienable rights. The right to live without fear of religious persecution. The right to peaceably assemble with others. The right to be secure in your own home from unwarranted government intrusion. The right to defend yourself from unjust attack.

Everyone is granted these rights. They are not rules of men. The rules of men only constrain, regulate, or demolish these rights in the hopelessly futile idea of "the common good." The fact that many billions of people have traded these rights away to their wolves in shepherds clothing is irrelevant to the point.