Subject:
|
Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 18 Jun 2004 13:16:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2441 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
> > > No No No. Not to our FF. Rights are given by God, or Nature's God, or
> > > however you want to characterize our Creator. This is [key], because if
> > > rights are granted by anything else, they are easily taken away.
> >
> > Um, these rights are already very easy to take away.
>
> Sure, IRL, but I was speaking theoretically, as I believe were the FF.
> Merely because someone is able to oppress me and take away my rights doesn't
> justify it.
When you are oppressed you retain your rights. There are only two ways to be
rid of rights: to surrender them (dangerously easy to do by mistake), and to
have them taken from you through due process as established by the US
Constitution. I guess I'm agreeing with John on this one except for the God
part -- any inherency of the rights makes them constant.
> > In any case, a socially-constructed right that can be taken away is not
> > readily distinguishable from a divinely-granted right that can be taken away
>
> Socially constructed rights are only as moral as the society that constructs
> them, which may or may not be just.
But divine edicts are only as moral as the society that constructs them, which
may or may not be just.
> Without the anchor of the Divine, a society can easily lose its moral
> compass, because reason and intellect are amoral (mixed metaphors
> notwithstanding:-)
I don't think so. I suspect that the reason that many of us observe that people
are generally "good" is that there is a strong evolutionary pressure on humans
to organize well. The definition of "good" is based on our ability to work and
play well with others. On some level, we don't want the other chimps in our
tribe to beat us with sticks, so we incorporate what they belive as part of our
internal dialog.
> I don't care if my representative is rich or poor; I seek people who are
> honest, decent, trustworthy, conscientious-- good people. People who truly
> seek to {serve} their country, not suck it dry.
Wow, you must have a hard time voting. (Actually, I do too.)
> > > > > The will of the people must be honored.
> >
> > > > Lynch mobs were organized according to the will of the people. Do you
> > > > assert that their will must therefore be honored?
> > >
> > > I don't condone cold-blooded murder, no matter how many call for it.
John, are you really a death-penalty opponent?
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) I can accept your formulation more readily because it doesn't appeal to deus ex machina, but I'm not comfortable with the notion of "inherency." How is inherency identified/verified, and who gets to decide what is inherent? Hmm. Now that I (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) Sure, IRL, but I was speaking theoretically, as I believe were the FF. Merely because someone is able to oppress me and take away my rights doesn't justify it. (...) That is precisely why I claim they are divinely-endowed, so that no one has (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
218 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
