| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Virgil" |
| Date: |
10 Apr 2004 04:25:49 PM |
| Object: |
Septic cites Creator as souce of rights! |
Skepticus AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, <skep@theatheism.web>
wrote in message news:<12u7c.57774$KO3.196593@attbi_s02>...
On this planet there is something absurd about taking someone's life or
liberty without due course of law. That contradicts everyone's
unalienable right to life, liberty, and due process of law. That
perfectly reasonable reductio ad absurdum is why we have laws
prohibiting such behavior.
Why do you think we have such laws, because God commanded "Thou shalt
not kill"?
IIRC, the source of "unalienable rights" is specifically said to be the
CREATOR in the first document to proclaim these rights:
"WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of
Happiness...
If Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, rejects any creator as the source,
what alternate source does he suggest which can endow all men with them?
.
|
|
| User: "Dale" |
|
| Title: Re: Septic cites Creator as souce of rights! |
10 Apr 2004 05:01:29 PM |
|
|
"Virgil" <ITSnetNOTcom/virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in message
news:ITSnetNOTcom/virgil-77CCAC.15254910042004@[63.218.45.211]...
Skepticus AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, <skep@theatheism.web>
wrote in message news:<12u7c.57774$KO3.196593@attbi_s02>...
On this planet there is something absurd about taking someone's life or
liberty without due course of law. That contradicts everyone's
unalienable right to life, liberty, and due process of law. That
perfectly reasonable reductio ad absurdum is why we have laws
prohibiting such behavior.
Why do you think we have such laws, because God commanded "Thou shalt
not kill"?
IIRC, the source of "unalienable rights" is specifically said to be the
CREATOR in the first document to proclaim these rights:
First? Don't they teach about the Magna Carta anymore?
"TO ALL FREE MEN OF OUR KINGDOM we have also granted, for us and our heirs
for ever, all the liberties written out below, to have and to keep for them
and their heirs, of us and our heirs:"
http://www.bl.uk/collections/treasures/magnatranslation.html
"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...
Where is that verse in the Bible by which all men are endowed with the right
to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? It doesn't exist. There's no
way anyone can come to this conclusion except by making up stuff. The
"Creator" in this case is a rhetorical device, not a declaration of faith in
the christian god. Recent usage of the Declaration of Independence by
religious right wing nuts such as George W. Bush to justify religious
oppression is a completely new perversion, at least I've never heard of it
before. Bush is too ignorant to know that this country's founders were not
christians.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Septic cites Creator as souce of rights! |
10 Apr 2004 07:11:53 PM |
|
|
In article <c59qq9$vc@library1.airnews.net>,
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote:
"Virgil" <ITSnetNOTcom/virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in message
news:ITSnetNOTcom/virgil-77CCAC.15254910042004@[63.218.45.211]...
Skepticus AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, <skep@theatheism.web>
wrote in message news:<12u7c.57774$KO3.196593@attbi_s02>...
On this planet there is something absurd about taking someone's life or
liberty without due course of law. That contradicts everyone's
unalienable right to life, liberty, and due process of law. That
perfectly reasonable reductio ad absurdum is why we have laws
prohibiting such behavior.
Why do you think we have such laws, because God commanded "Thou shalt
not kill"?
IIRC, the source of "unalienable rights" is specifically said to be the
CREATOR in the first document to proclaim these rights:
First? Don't they teach about the Magna Carta anymore?
"TO ALL FREE MEN OF OUR KINGDOM we have also granted, for us and our heirs
for ever, all the liberties written out below, to have and to keep for them
and their heirs, of us and our heirs:"
http://www.bl.uk/collections/treasures/magnatranslation.html
I do not see the phrase "unalienable rights" there. The idea need not
have been original with the Declaration, but the wording was, to the
best of my knowledge, at least.
"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...
Where is that verse in the Bible by which all men are endowed with the right
to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? It doesn't exist.
Take that up with the Thomas Jefferson. I understand that the wording
was his.
I don't require a Creator in order to accept that there should be
unalienable rights. What I was objecting to was Septic Capon, the Simple
Pimple, asserting that the idea of people having rights that are
unalienable was in no way associated with the idea that there might be a
Creator. The Declaration of Independence does mention a Creator as the
source of those rights.
There's no
way anyone can come to this conclusion except by making up stuff. The
"Creator" in this case is a rhetorical device, not a declaration of faith in
the christian god. Recent usage of the Declaration of Independence by
religious right wing nuts such as George W. Bush to justify religious
oppression is a completely new perversion, at least I've never heard of it
before. Bush is too ignorant to know that this country's founders were not
christians.
I, too, find Bushian "Christianity" more of like an Inquisition than
loving one's neighbor.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "sol" |
|
| Title: Re: Septic cites Creator as souce of rights! |
10 Apr 2004 07:03:59 PM |
|
|
If Human Rights were God-given, God would have given Moses the Bill of
Rights, not the 10 Commandments. Unless you claim that Moses misplaced
them.....
"Virgil" <ITSnetNOTcom/virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in message
news:ITSnetNOTcom/virgil-77CCAC.15254910042004@[63.218.45.211]...
Skepticus AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, <skep@theatheism.web>
wrote in message news:<12u7c.57774$KO3.196593@attbi_s02>...
On this planet there is something absurd about taking someone's life or
liberty without due course of law. That contradicts everyone's
unalienable right to life, liberty, and due process of law. That
perfectly reasonable reductio ad absurdum is why we have laws
prohibiting such behavior.
Why do you think we have such laws, because God commanded "Thou shalt
not kill"?
IIRC, the source of "unalienable rights" is specifically said to be the
CREATOR in the first document to proclaim these rights:
"WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of
Happiness...
If Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, rejects any creator as the source,
what alternate source does he suggest which can endow all men with them?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: there ought to be a law |
10 Apr 2004 09:17:02 PM |
|
|
sol wrote:
If Human Rights were God-given, God would have given Moses the Bill of
Rights, not the 10 Commandments. Unless you claim that Moses misplaced
them.....
It is not the case that there is a God to give anybody anything,
Virgil's unsupported assertion to the affirmative notwithstanding. There
ain't nobody here but us chickens.
"Virgil" <ITSnetNOTcom/virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in message
news:ITSnetNOTcom/virgil-77CCAC.15254910042004@[63.218.45.211]...
Skepticus AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, <skep@theatheism.web>
wrote in message news:<12u7c.57774$KO3.196593@attbi_s02>...
On this planet there is something absurd about taking someone's life or
liberty without due course of law. That contradicts everyone's
unalienable right to life, liberty, and due process of law. That
perfectly reasonable reductio ad absurdum is why we have laws
prohibiting such behavior.
Why do you think we have such laws, because God commanded "Thou shalt
not kill"?
IIRC, the source of "unalienable rights" is specifically said to be the
CREATOR in the first document to proclaim these rights:
"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...
If Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, rejects any creator as the source,
what alternate source does he suggest which can endow all men with them?
I don't know about Virgil, who might have arisin ex nihilo, but my Momma
and Daddy created me.
The truth is that regardless of the fact that there is no God, we all
come into the world automatically endowed with certain unalienable
rights because the contrary would be an absurd situation. Google
reductio ad absurdum, a perfectly reasonable way to reach a conclusion
that there ought to be laws protecting these unalienable human rights.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: there ought to be a law |
11 Apr 2004 01:00:20 AM |
|
|
In article <xU1ec.7704$wP1.26940@attbi_s54>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
sol wrote:
If Human Rights were God-given, God would have given Moses the Bill of
Rights, not the 10 Commandments. Unless you claim that Moses misplaced
them.....
It is not the case that there is a God to give anybody anything,
Virgil's unsupported assertion to the affirmative notwithstanding. There
ain't nobody here but us chickens.
"Virgil" <ITSnetNOTcom/virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in message
news:ITSnetNOTcom/virgil-77CCAC.15254910042004@[63.218.45.211]...
Skepticus AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, <skep@theatheism.web>
wrote in message news:<12u7c.57774$KO3.196593@attbi_s02>...
On this planet there is something absurd about taking someone's life or
liberty without due course of law. That contradicts everyone's
unalienable right to life, liberty, and due process of law. That
perfectly reasonable reductio ad absurdum is why we have laws
prohibiting such behavior.
Why do you think we have such laws, because God commanded "Thou shalt
not kill"?
IIRC, the source of "unalienable rights" is specifically said to be the
CREATOR in the first document to proclaim these rights:
"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...
If Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, rejects any creator as the source,
what alternate source does he suggest which can endow all men with them?
I don't know about Virgil, who might have arisin ex nihilo, but my Momma
and Daddy created me.
It is the creation of those allegedly unalienable rights that is the
issue, as anyone who can read would have known.
What Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple's momma and daddy diddled up in
their laboratory, no doubt with the muddled help of Igor, was not.
The truth is that regardless of the fact that there is no God, we all
come into the world automatically endowed with certain unalienable
rights because the contrary would be an absurd situation. Google
reductio ad absurdum, a perfectly reasonable way to reach a conclusion
that there ought to be laws protecting these unalienable human rights.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "W. Syme" |
|
| Title: Re: Septic cites Creator as souce of rights! |
11 Apr 2004 04:31:01 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 15:25:49 -0600, Virgil
<ITSnetNOTcom/virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote:
Skepticus AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, <skep@theatheism.web>
wrote in message news:<12u7c.57774$KO3.196593@attbi_s02>...
On this planet there is something absurd about taking someone's life or
liberty without due course of law. That contradicts everyone's
unalienable right to life, liberty, and due process of law. That
perfectly reasonable reductio ad absurdum is why we have laws
prohibiting such behavior.
Why do you think we have such laws, because God commanded "Thou shalt
not kill"?
IIRC, the source of "unalienable rights" is specifically said to be the
CREATOR in the first document to proclaim these rights:
"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...
If Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, rejects any creator as the source,
what alternate source does he suggest which can endow all men with them?
You need an authority to actually TELL you not to kill people? Damn.
--
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thessalonians 5:21)
W. Syme (pseudonym), European, non-native English speaker, "soft" atheist.
Email will not be read.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
