15+ Dead In Texas School Shooting; 18-y.o. student Salvador Ramos Identified As Shooter

Temujin

Well-known member
Wrong, Some people accpet the evidence as presented. Others do not believe it.

And if his last communication was 2000 years ago, it is sufficent to give us want we need,

And people who believe this way have as much rights as anyone else to make public policy.
They have as much right as anyone to contribute and to argue that their personal views should be acted on. Claiming to speak for God should not give extra weight to anyone's opinion.
 

Yakuda

Well-known member
They have as much right as anyone to contribute and to argue that their personal views should be acted on. Claiming to speak for God should not give extra weight to anyone's opinion.
It should have when hitler was deciding Jews should be incinerated
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Tell us what's wrong with the 10 commandments as a basis for laws. I would concede people shouldn't be forced to worship God but what's wrong with the rest of them as a moral basis for law.
What is wrong with them is the claim that they originate from God. That implies firstly that they are immutable and comprehensive, and secondly that human beings are incapable of coming up with simple laws.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
It should have when hitler was deciding Jews should be incinerated
Umm, are you referring to the fact that Christians in Germany supported Hitler or that the Atheist empire of the Soviet Union fought against him, losing rather more in the process than even the Jews in the concentration camps?
 

Yakuda

Well-known member
What is wrong with them is the claim that they originate from God. That implies firstly that they are immutable and comprehensive, and secondly that human beings are incapable of coming up with simple laws.
So the only reason you think they are bad is the claim they come from God.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Just as legislation wont stop abortions, gun control wont stop these things.
Education is needed but not the kind we are getting at the moment which is just making it worse.
 

Yakuda

Well-known member
Umm, are you referring to the fact that Christians in Germany supported Hitler or that the Atheist empire of the Soviet Union fought against him, losing rather more in the process than even the Jews in the concentration camps?
No not at all but I don't expect you to actually think objectively as it's not a leftist value.

Let's try a different approach. Hitler was of the opinion that the Jews polluted the gene pool and we're responsible for all manner of evil so needed to be eliminated. Another person might have been of the opinion that Jews were human beings and deserved to live. You're saying Hitler's opinion should be given as much weight as the other persons. Whether or not christians participated has nothing to do with the weight of the opinion unless of course you want to ignore the obvious problem.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
So the only reason you think they are bad is the claim they come from God.
You are jumping to conclusions again, not bothering to read what I post and making things up based on your prejudicial stereotypes. I said quite clearly what I thought was wrong.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Umm, are you referring to the fact that Christians in Germany supported Hitler or that the Atheist empire of the Soviet Union fought against him, losing rather more in the process than even the Jews in the concentration camps?
Like atheists support pro-choice abortion.
It actually shows how much we need a savoiur and how much people need to repent.
 

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
How many guns do you own?

How about we stop selling military-styled weapons to civilians.
No bump stocks, large magazines, ghost guns.
Crackdown on straw purchases and gun shops that supply criminals in places like Chicago and NYC.
Make sure all gun-owners register and insure their weapons so that they are fully responsible for crimes committed with them.
Serious and complete background checks for all purchases or transfers.
Red flag laws.
No guns under 18 years old.
limits on the numbers of guns per person and ammo restrictions.
No guns for felons or anyone under a restraining order.
No open or concealed carry.
Gun purchasers should have a reason to own a gun. Like hunting.
Guns in airplane carryon bags confiscated, and owners made to pay a huge fine. Jail on second offense.
Safety requirements so that only the purchaser can fire the gun.
Serious training in advance of purchase, and yearly updated training, all at the gun owner's expense.
Fully fund federal research into the use and abuse of guns.

400 million guns in America that have never been loaded/pointed at a human.
Your Marxist disdain for the Constitution is palpable.

We need to crack down on abortion. 1,800 dead babies today.
 

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
And do you think the deaths of innocent children is worth making gun ownership legal, just to allow people to pretend to be Rambo, or to feed their irrational fears of marauding home invaders or their treasonous goal of bringing down the federal govt?
Satan prefers abortion/eugenics.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
No not at all but I don't expect you to actually think objectively as it's not a leftist value.

Let's try a different approach. Hitler was of the opinion that the Jews polluted the gene pool and we're responsible for all manner of evil so needed to be eliminated. Another person might have been of the opinion that Jews were human beings and deserved to live. You're saying Hitler's opinion should be given as much weight as the other persons. Whether or not christians participated has nothing to do with the weight of the opinion unless of course you want to ignore the obvious problem.
Nope. Perhaps you can show me where I said that Hitler's opinion should be given equal weight. You are jumping to conclusions again, skipping what I actually say and inserting made up phrases that fit your prejudicial stereotypes. I am definitely seeing a pattern.
 

Yakuda

Well-known member
You are jumping to conclusions again, not bothering to read what I post and making things up based on your prejudicial stereotypes. I said quite clearly what I thought was wrong.
That's the main crux of your argument and upon which the rest is based. The fact is the commandments.make a great basis for laws but you haven't got the courage to admit it. I get it, your lib friends won't invite you for tea anymore.
 

Yakuda

Well-known member
Nope. Perhaps you can show me where I said that Hitler's opinion should be given equal weight. You are jumping to conclusions again, skipping what I actually say and inserting made up phrases that fit your prejudicial stereotypes. I am definitely seeing a pattern.
We'll you prove once again you're a concrete thinker. That may be a result of what's between your ears.

Will if laws and rights come from man and Hitler was a man and the man in charge then there is no basis upon which to question his opinion. He was in charge and he made the rules. Case closed.
 

mikeT

Well-known member
But that is exactly the point. All rights are subject to being removed. What about the rights of Jews in Nazi Germany? What about the rights of Japanese internees in the US, or Afrikaans women and children in the Boer War? Where was God with his inalienable rights then? You can declare that rights come from anywhere you like, but the reality is that they are granted by those who have power over you, and can be taken away in like manner. All rights are granted, and taken away, by human beings. Claiming they come from God is just a Republican version of the Divine Right of kings.
First, I agree with the vast majority of what you wrote above, even though the following text focuses on the disagreement:

@Crazy Ivan suggested that we create a thread dedicated to this topic, and it'd be a good idea. Rights are indeed granted and taken away by human beings, but even if gods do the same thing, the concept needs to be abstracted a bit.

A right is a privilege of some kind, where the privilege protects the specified behavior. The right to cross a busy road on foot is effectively protection for that person from anyone who'd prevent them from crossing. However, if there is no protection, the right doesn't exist - such as cars continuing to drive through the crosswalk without regard for the person trying to cross.

I can grant rights; I can tell a friend they have the right to borrow money from me at any time. If there comes a time when I refuse to lend them money, they never had the aforementioned right.

When it comes to human society, enforcement often comes too late to be useful - but this does not necessarily invalidate the rights it grants. For example, Jews in WWII had the right to life, even though they were slaughtered. Protection for those lives came too late, but the perpetrators were eventually punished to some extent - which means that right still existed.

---

Gods who grant us the right to life but don't punish those who'd take it from us have not granted us rights. We have no evidence human murderers (et al) are actually being punished in an afterlife, so any talk about rights coming from gods can be safely laughed at.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
That's the main crux of your argument and upon which the rest is based. The fact is the commandments.make a great basis for laws but you haven't got the courage to admit it. I get it, your lib friends won't invite you for tea anymore.
Not at all. The sentiment behind the bulk of the commandments is fine, because they reflect human values. What is wrong with them is not their provenance, which anyway I dispute as unlikely, but the claim by men, that other men should not bring them up to date because God handed them down, and also that because God handed them down, no other laws are necessary.
 
Top