God given rights. Do you really have any?

[Greatest I am]

God given rights. Do you really have any?

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.

Do "other" people find it a coincidence that some people's views of 'God given rights' align with the government, or with the culture, of the country they are in?

Not I as our thinking is formed by the societies we live in.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

When one is born they absolutely have a right to life because it is automatically granted to all human beings
And one has all the other fundamental human rights too on point of birth as laid down by the United Nations

You do know that most countries in the U.N. have not signed on to the U. N.'s bill of rights. Right?

Guess who heads the U. N.'s rights tribunal. Mostly Muslim nations who want to impose blasphemy laws on us to protect Islam from criticism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... TdKxCz2FIQ

Regards
DL

[gaffo]

We have instinct given rights, via man the social animal - an instinct for what is right and what is not right.

we have a personal duty to strive to do right by that instinct and to foster any government that also affirms that natural law right. and to remove any gov that does not.

I don't know if being able to judge is an instinct, given how often we are wrong in our judgements, but I won't argue for now.

What instinct given rights do you see our instincts giving us, if that is what you meant, before adding via man, which kind of screws up your instinct given statement.

Perhaps it is just the way I read you.

Regards
DL

I think man is born - via a social amimal - to foster the good of the collective. i.e our conscience.

we all know right from wrong - its inborn. if some ignore their conscience and judge to be a dick (and too many do) - they do so against the conscience they were born with (they kill their conscience for self gain).

[Age]

God given rights. Do you really have any?

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.

Do "other" people find it a coincidence that some people's views of 'God given rights' align with the government, or with the culture, of the country they are in?

Not I as our thinking is formed by the societies we live in.

Regards
DL

Yes our individual thinking is formed by the societies we each individually live in. The saying Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness is usually just confined to those who live in the united states of america. It is not a saying usually said by peoples of other countries. So, I find it a coincidence when people think or believe that the Creator would have endowed human beings with these so called "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" rights, which happen to be only associated those from the united states of america.

God would not and does not endow human beings with only those particular sayings from particular countries. God would and does endow human beings with universal rights, not particular rights associated with particular governments, cultures, societies, nor cultures.

[Greatest I am]

We have instinct given rights, via man the social animal - an instinct for what is right and what is not right.

we have a personal duty to strive to do right by that instinct and to foster any government that also affirms that natural law right. and to remove any gov that does not.

I don't know if being able to judge is an instinct, given how often we are wrong in our judgements, but I won't argue for now.

What instinct given rights do you see our instincts giving us, if that is what you meant, before adding via man, which kind of screws up your instinct given statement.

Perhaps it is just the way I read you.

Regards
DL

I think man is born - via a social amimal - to foster the good of the collective. i.e our conscience.

we all know right from wrong - its inborn. if some ignore their conscience and judge to be a dick (and too many do) - they do so against the conscience they were born with (they kill their conscience for self gain).

You are partly correct and partly incorrect .

Nature, and our selfish gene says that we put our lives ahead of the collective. We are tribal as you say, but that is our second concern, Not our first.

Yes many ignore their moral sense for self gain. Every lying preacher I know does this.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Do "other" people find it a coincidence that some people's views of 'God given rights' align with the government, or with the culture, of the country they are in?

Not I as our thinking is formed by the societies we live in.

Regards
DL

Yes our individual thinking is formed by the societies we each individually live in. The saying Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness is usually just confined to those who live in the united states of america. It is not a saying usually said by peoples of other countries. So, I find it a coincidence when people think or believe that the Creator would have endowed human beings with these so called "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" rights, which happen to be only associated those from the united states of america.

God would not and does not endow human beings with only those particular sayings from particular countries. God would and does endow human beings with universal rights, not particular rights associated with particular governments, cultures, societies, nor cultures.

What rights do you see as god given, and how does he enforce them when someone is denied those rights?

BTW, many constitutions have a life, liberty and security of the person written into their constitutions or social contracts.

Most apply them better than the U.S., thanks to your corrupted political system.

Regards
DL

[Age]

Not I as our thinking is formed by the societies we live in.

Regards
DL

Yes our individual thinking is formed by the societies we each individually live in. The saying Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness is usually just confined to those who live in the united states of america. It is not a saying usually said by peoples of other countries. So, I find it a coincidence when people think or believe that the Creator would have endowed human beings with these so called "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" rights, which happen to be only associated those from the united states of america.

God would not and does not endow human beings with only those particular sayings from particular countries. God would and does endow human beings with universal rights, not particular rights associated with particular governments, cultures, societies, nor cultures.

What rights do you see as god given, and how does he enforce them when someone is denied those rights?

You would first have to understand how I define the word 'God'.

God is NOT a "he", by the way, and NEVER was.

God does NOT "force" nor "enforce" any thing. The consequences of actions/behavior works things out for themselves. So, if human beings are denying rights to living things, then things will work out how 'just', as they do.

BTW, many constitutions have a life, liberty and security of the person written into their constitutions or social contracts.

Again, Do "other" people find it a coincidence that some people's views of 'God given rights' align with the ( written words/constitutions) of governments, or with the culture, of the country they are in?

Most apply them better than the U.S., thanks to your corrupted political system.

Regards
DL

What do you mean by "your corrupted political system"? What exactly are you assuming here?

Also, how many actual constitutions have the words "Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness" in them?

[gaffo]

I don't know if being able to judge is an instinct, given how often we are wrong in our judgements, but I won't argue for now.

What instinct given rights do you see our instincts giving us, if that is what you meant, before adding via man, which kind of screws up your instinct given statement.

Perhaps it is just the way I read you.

Regards
DL

I think man is born - via a social amimal - to foster the good of the collective. i.e our conscience.

we all know right from wrong - its inborn. if some ignore their conscience and judge to be a dick (and too many do) - they do so against the conscience they were born with (they kill their conscience for self gain).

You are partly correct and partly incorrect .

Nature, and our selfish gene says that we put our lives ahead of the collective. We are tribal as you say, but that is our second concern, Not our first.

Yes many ignore their moral sense for self gain. Every lying preacher I know does this.

Regards
DL

there are selfish and collective genes. even the selfish one serve the collecive ones when not in opposition.

[Greatest I am]

Yes our individual thinking is formed by the societies we each individually live in. The saying Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness is usually just confined to those who live in the united states of america. It is not a saying usually said by peoples of other countries. So, I find it a coincidence when people think or believe that the Creator would have endowed human beings with these so called "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" rights, which happen to be only associated those from the united states of america.

God would not and does not endow human beings with only those particular sayings from particular countries. God would and does endow human beings with universal rights, not particular rights associated with particular governments, cultures, societies, nor cultures.

What rights do you see as god given, and how does he enforce them when someone is denied those rights?

You would first have to understand how I define the word 'God'.

God is NOT a "he", by the way, and NEVER was.

God does NOT "force" nor "enforce" any thing. The consequences of actions/behavior works things out for themselves. So, if human beings are denying rights to living things, then things will work out how 'just', as they do.

BTW, many constitutions have a life, liberty and security of the person written into their constitutions or social contracts.

Again, Do "other" people find it a coincidence that some people's views of 'God given rights' align with the ( written words/constitutions) of governments, or with the culture, of the country they are in?

Most apply them better than the U.S., thanks to your corrupted political system.

Regards
DL

What do you mean by "your corrupted political system"? What exactly are you assuming here?

Also, how many actual constitutions have the words "Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness" in them?

IDK.

I have yet to read them all, but most, even though the wording might not be identical.

A constitution is a contract between the state and the citizen. The citizens life is central to the contract. If it was not, it would not be worth signing on.

As to the corruption of your republic, it begins by being an oligarchy instead of a democratic republic.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

God is NOT a "he", by the way, and NEVER was.

I will nor argue against this unprovable statement.

How can you know this as a fact? Have you accessed the supernatural realm where god resides?

Or was yout comment more of a knee jerk response?

Regards
DL

[Immanuel Can]

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. The fact that they often are, indicates that he is shirking his duty.

Non-sequitur, because as you point out, a "right" is the kind of thing that CAN be taken away...not legitimately, but illegitimately. When one violates someone else's genuine "rights," then one becomes a bad person oneself -- the victim's moral status remaining utterly unaffected by the action. That's on you, the perp. You answer for it; they don't.

This is what we mean when we say that, say, a woman is being "denied her right to speak." We mean not that it cannot be taken away from her, but that it cannot be so done legitimately -- and that those who do it are rights violators, who answer to God for their actions...if not now, when the great Day of Reckoning comes.

That's the difference with the Theistic perspective: it does not limit itself to the mere horizon of the present, and act as if life ends with the grave. Rather, it insists that all bills will be paid, one way or the other. The accounting will be made.

And there will be no "shirking" of that duty, you can be sure.

[henry quirk]

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us.

As I reckon it: free will is double-edged; we get to choose & we get to live with the consequences of our choices (includin', especially, the bad ones).

And, I reckon it: the linchpin of rights is ownness (a person belongs to himself).

Finally: as I reckon it, God gave each the capacity to self-direct (free will), and the wherewithal to defend that capacity; if we fail in that self-defense, that's on us, not Him.

[Immanuel Can]

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us.

As I reckon it: free will is double-edged; we get to choose & we get to live with the consequences of our choices (includin', especially, the bad ones).

Right. And even more than that, free-will means not just the opportunity to choose for oneself, but also the possibility of helping or harming others. One can use one's autonomy and property to bless (as in giving to orphanages) or do injury (as in beating another person with a baseball bat, or burning down his business).

That's how rights get taken away: one person, or group of persons, uses his/their God-granted autonomy and free will, but choose to use it as an exercise to harm others or to deny to others the autonomy and dignity they are also rightly owed.

But were such things made deterministically impossible, then individual autonomy and free will would be barricaded off at any point outside the private cognitions of the individual -- which would not be genuine freedom of choice at all. One could want to choose the bad or the good, but could not actually choose between them; there would only be the possibility of actualizing one choice, so there would be no real choice at all -- though there might still be an internal yearning to do the bad thing, it would be impossible anyway.

[Greatest I am]

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us. The fact that they often are, indicates that he is shirking his duty.

Non-sequitur, because as you point out, a "right" is the kind of thing that CAN be taken away...not legitimately, but illegitimately. When one violates someone else's genuine "rights," then one becomes a bad person oneself -- the victim's moral status remaining utterly unaffected by the action. That's on you, the perp. You answer for it; they don't.

This is what we mean when we say that, say, a woman is being "denied her right to speak." We mean not that it cannot be taken away from her, but that it cannot be so done legitimately -- and that those who do it are rights violators, who answer to God for their actions...if not now, when the great Day of Reckoning comes.

That's the difference with the Theistic perspective: it does not limit itself to the mere horizon of the present, and act as if life ends with the grave. Rather, it insists that all bills will be paid, one way or the other. The accounting will be made.

And there will be no "shirking" of that duty, you can be sure.

All that is said of an afterlife is speculative nonsense and only fools will believe things without facts to back them up.

You can speculate all you want, and present it as such without being thought of as a fool, but faith without facts makes fools of many.

Especially those who call a genocidal Yahweh a good god.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

If a right is given to a soul, by god, he would have a duty to ensure that they are never taken from us.

As I reckon it: free will is double-edged; we get to choose & we get to live with the consequences of our choices (includin', especially, the bad ones).

And, I reckon it: the linchpin of rights is ownness (a person belongs to himself).

Finally: as I reckon it, God gave each the capacity to self-direct (free will), and the wherewithal to defend that capacity; if we fail in that self-defense, that's on us, not Him.

We must be reading different bibles as mine clearly shows that Yahweh does not give us a free will.

Do you dispute/deny all the quotes in this old O.P. of mine?

------------

Are non-believers doomed by Divine Design?

Scriptures say that God decides if a person will be a believer or non-believer. Those scriptures are shown in this link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byHYeHN4ZUQ

Those quotes seems to really screw up the free will notion that Christians say God gives us.

The free will that God offers is kind of a joke anyway given the number of people whose free will to live is ignored in the billions of adults, children and babies that God is shown to torture and murder in scriptures.

If the bible and Yahweh are to be believed, and as a non-believer, I, of course, cannot believe it, thanks to God, by God’s design and will against me, then why did God deny me belief or faith?

Even more important to believers, might be to answer the question of; did God make you a believer in things that you can only hope exists and can never confirm?

Are you happy with God ignoring or negating your free will to think as you please?

I have assumed that God’s work of creating both believers and non-believers is working. If that is so, and you believers must think it so, just as I as a non-believer cannot think it is working, --- and Jesus said that those with faith could do all he did and more, --- then there is not even one believer or person of faith that has ever existed.

Either the bible and Christianity is all a lie, or there must be some who can do what Jesus did.


What is your choice of those two options?

Is the bible and Christianity a lie, or is God just not creating any people with faith, --- which would make all Christians who say they have faith, --- liars.

I mean no insult here but someone is definitely lying, if we read what is written and look at reality and listen to Christians.

What do you think is the truth?

Is it just for God to create people doomed to hell even if they wanted to believe?

Regards
DL