Declaration of Independence

@wajoma said
The political prisoner standing in front of a firing squad with a bullet rushing towards his head has the same right to life everyone else has.

If he committed a capital crime, for which he is being executed, he has no right to life. You libs are a trip. Too much Stolen Rum??

@no1marauder said
Not at all.

Grotius dealt with this argument in the early 1600s:

" He argued that a law deduced from man’s inherent nature would have a degree of validity
even if we should concede that which cannot be conceded without the utmost wickedness, that there is no God, or that the affairs of men are of no concern to Him. (Prolegomena, 11.)"

https://www.britanni ...[text shortened]... itled to by that Nature. Of course, we can say that nature is derived from a Creator God if we wish.

I will say this. I kid Marauder a lot, he is a good sport, but I gotta say there is nothing funny about his 'sourcing'. Grotius??????

Five Stars for Marauder. I don't really know what the hell he says above, but I will just submit to his digging up some by-dam rights!

@averagejoe1 said
I will say this. I kid Marauder a lot, he is a good sport, but I gotta say there is nothing funny about his 'sourcing'. Grotius??????

Five Stars for Marauder. I don't really know what the hell he says above, but I will just submit to his digging up some by-dam rights!

Have you ever read a book or just colored them?

@mott-the-hoople said
that is the states (the people) function. What you suggest is for scotus to act in a totalitarian manner. The scotus doesnt have the power to make law or give rights.

You are very confused on this.

This power rests with THE PEOPLE through elected representatives.

The DoI describes Rights as "inalienable" that means " unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor."

But according to you, a legislature can decide you have a "right" and then a later legislature can take it away. It is impossible to reconcile your views with the clear words of the Founders.

@no1marauder said
Try reading the Ninth Amendment.

No, it is not to transient majorities to decide what basic, Natural Rights are. Those who created this country would be horrified at such a suggestion.

You should stop babbling and actually read some of their works. I'd suggest Rights of Man by Thomas Paine though Madison's collected works would also perhaps solve your stubborn ignorance.

“No, it is not to transient majorities to decide what basic, Natural Rights are.”

So you consider >the people< “transient majorities”?

What a fuking fool you are.

@mott-the-hoople said
“No, it is not to transient majorities to decide what basic, Natural Rights are.”

So you consider >the people< “transient majorities”?

What a fuking fool you are.

Your insults aren't an argument.

Rights are something that are not effected by elections; they are "inalienable". It's not even up to the People to decide what your rights are; again the DoI couldn't be clearer on this matter.

And one of the examples of rights given in the DoI is "liberty"; it is hard to imagine that doesn't include bodily autonomy or the liberty to do as one pleases with their own body and all it contains (unless, of course, it effects someone else's rights).

@averagejoe1 said
Watch it MG, you are digging a hole. If the framers confirmed that the rights came from an entity that it ends up is non-existent, then the 'rights' do not exist!!!!!
So we need to tell Marauder he has to re-write all of his screeds about these seeming rights that we are all supposed to have. There are NO rights.
Ball in your court.

Libs. Jesus .

Don't worry about me.......
Think about the US population in the near future where more than 50% don't believe in a Creator.
It won't be Marauder doing the rewriting.

@shallow-blue said
Not even that. Many of the best bits they nicked from the Dutch Plakkaat van Verlatinghe.

That was sort of its strength it took the best in terms of human aspirations of its day and formed a government around them, the problem is the further we get away from the 18th century the more archaic and moribund it appears to be. That and it’s vulnerability to infinite interpretation and hand washing.
Try getting two average people to agree on what ‘freedom’ looks like and then try it with a progressive liberal and a social conservative.

@no1marauder said
Your insults aren't an argument.

Rights are something that are not effected by elections; they are "inalienable". It's not even up to the People to decide what your rights are; again the DoI couldn't be clearer on this matter.

And one of the examples of rights given in the DoI is "liberty"; it is hard to imagine that doesn't include bodily autonomy or the liberty to ...[text shortened]... eases with their own body and all it contains (unless, of course, it effects someone else's rights).

You are confused again.

The declaration of independence bears no legal weight.

The “constitution” sets laws and rights.

It is ignorant to think oterwise.

@mghrn55 said
Don't worry about me.......
Think about the US population in the near future where more than 50% don't believe in a Creator.
It won't be Marauder doing the rewriting.

marerider thinks the “creator” gives rights, the “creator” that doest exist according to libs.

Y’all are some fuked up people

@no1marauder said
Have you ever read a book or just colored them?

You got me. Must have missed the class about Grotious, never heard of him.

@no1marauder said
Your insults aren't an argument.

Rights are something that are not effected by elections; they are "inalienable". It's not even up to the People to decide what your rights are; again the DoI couldn't be clearer on this matter.

And one of the examples of rights given in the DoI is "liberty"; it is hard to imagine that doesn't include bodily autonomy or the liberty to ...[text shortened]... eases with their own body and all it contains (unless, of course, it effects someone else's rights).

Libs should tread lightly on the subject of Liberty. Libs do not believe in liberty. What they have in plans for this country definitely skew the concept of Liberty. (Freedom from govt control).

@mott-the-hoople said
marerider thinks the “creator” gives rights, the “creator” that doest exist according to libs.

Y’all are some fuked up people

Hey halfwit you can be a theist and a liberal you know, a belief in god doesn’t make incest and racism compulsory.

@kevcvs57 said
Hey halfwit you can be a theist and a liberal you know, a belief in god doesn’t make incest and racism compulsory.

why do you libs jump off the deep end when trying to defend your fuked up views?

@averagejoe1 said
You got me. Must have missed the class about Grotious, never heard of him.

And yet, here you are yacking your yap off about natural, inalienable rights.

You do realise that's a bit like having an opinion on gravity while not knowing who Newton was, don't you? (But of course you don't.)