Posted on 11/08/2006 10:24:16 AM PST by Keltik
Ever read the Declaration of Independance? You know, the document our country was founded on?
"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. 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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — "
The purpose of government, here in the US anyway, is to secure the inalieanable rights of the people. Funny, I can't seem to find anything about enforcing God's laws and restraining people's evil inclanation. But perhaps you need your evil inclinations restrained.
Yes. But unfortunately for you, Thomas Jefferson didn't create the universe.
"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. 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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — "
The latter part is of course pure mythology. Government did not begin as a free contract among sovereign individuals who voluntarily entered into a "social contract" to secure the "rights" that were theirs from "the state of nature." Locke and the others simply had to pretend this was the case in order to change the current systems. But however useful it may be, it's still a myth. Funny how the people who depend on it are the same ones who insist that Ezra wrote the Torah and then "retrojected" it into the days of Moses!
The purpose of government, here in the US anyway, is to secure the inalieanable rights of the people. Funny, I can't seem to find anything about enforcing God's laws and restraining people's evil inclanation.
The Declaration of Independence isn't the "DNA" of the Universe. The Torah is.
But perhaps you need your evil inclinations restrained.
Funny, but I kind of had the idea that the most rational rationalist defended locking people up or even executing them under certain conditions. How does the mere absence of a Creator and Ultimate Meaning make such measures magically more "humane?" Do the convicts being raped / people being fried in the electric chair derive comfort from reflecting in their final moment of agony that "the universe is a closed system of causes and effects?"
"Reason" can excuse anything that religion can, including torture (as Alan Dershowitz has demonstrated). But it cannot (contrary to "rationalist" dogma) create or sustain objective meaning where none exists.
Any more admirers of Locke/Jefferson/Hume/Smith/Voltaire/Rousseau want to try to shame or horrify me by calling me "un-American?" I'll simply smile and say "d@mn right!"
I'm a Theocrat! You can't insult me by calling me what I am!
No, you are a loon.
Everytime you open your mouth, the world's IQ drops a point. You are loon squared. You are loon to the tenth power.
Your looniness has caused bridges to collapse, ant infestations, and crop circles.
When you open your mouth, people in mental institutions rattle the bars with joy.
They all hum the same song: "the latter part is pure mythology."
You have to be a professor of something, to be that dumb.
Yes, but he did found our country, along with others. The universe is large; perhaps you should find another space?
"The latter part is of course pure mythology."
The Declaration of independance is mythology???
Either you are a public teacher, or a moron.
I hope all our "torturers" at Guantanamo are atheists. That takes all the unpleasantness out of the experience, I hear.
The only person talking about the DNA of the universe is you.
Nutjob.
Ah, now I know.
You are a sleeper Freeper, coming out of the woodwork.
nite.
I seem to recall there being a rule against "personal attacks," but since you don't believe in G-d that makes you automatically a "reasonable" person who simply cannot be guilty of any such sin. Only religious people go around calling people names.
But I'm glad you're calling off the childish ping pong game. It was never going to change either of our minds.
Never read my tagline, did you.
Historically, we've had our experiences with theocrats, and found it necessary to make explicit provisions against them.
Yes. I'm sorry you're unable to read mine.
Good night.
Naturally. Just because the universe is one gigantic meaningless coincidence doesn't mean we can't make up arbitrary standards of "right" and "wrong" and then enforce them on others, right? It's only tyrannical if a theoretical Creator of the Universe does it.
I've been here since '99, people. I've heard them all. I can't change your mind, you can't change mine. I'm sorry if you feel some sort of biochemical compulsion to post to this thread nevertheless merely to insult me.
I blame myself for not doing enough. /Sigh
You say you are a Theocrat, and don't feel insulted by being called one, and then wail about being insulted. You are one odd little duck.
I wasn't called a "Theocrat." I was called a "nutjob." (I know, you're sterling response is "what's the difference?") I'm sorry that I don't understand why people who don't believe in G-d have special permission to call people with whom they disagree such names, but it seems to apply as much to "individualist" Jefferson-worshipping atheists as it does to Rosie O'Donnell.
Libertarians must have an awful lot of time on their hands. They hang around for hours to make post after post after post that ultimately says nothing more than "nyah-nyah."
My response was strictly to your own description of yourself as a Theocrat.
If one person calls you a "nutjob" and you proceed to assume that you have been insulted not only by that person, but every other person you subsequently encounter, you're pretty much making their case for them.
Theocrats must have an awful lot of time on their hands. They hang around for hours to make posts like -- "-- one of the prime purposes of government is to enforce G-d's laws and restrain man's evil inclinations --".
Gotta love the irony of posting anti-constitutional "nyah-nyah" on a site dedicated to constitutional restoration.
I'm sure if a few more of you take the time to insult me you will change my mind.
C'mon, this is important! We're only at 400+ posts. We need a few more hundred more that make no point whatsoever other than to tell me I'm wrong. The sheer number of posts alone will eventually do the trick.
I think it's about time for Carolina Guitarman to make the mutually exclusive claims that 1)the world has no meaning and 2)an absolutely objective moral standard nevertheless exists.
A perfectly valid point. My apologies.
One poster (name not recalled) simply decided to engage in a childish game of "I got the last word in!" (granted, this would stop if I would stop participating so I also share the blame here).
For what it's worth, libertarians and atheists/agnostics are not the only persons who do this. Just a week or so ago a couple of Fundamentalist Protestant chr*stians did the same thing, continually responding to my requests for proof of their beliefs with an almost celebratory fideism--and they absolutely refused to stop! They were compelled to merely post over and over that "I know I'm right!" Just please be aware that this attitude is a foible of common humanity and is not limited to Fundamentalist Protestants, chr*stians (I am not a chr*stian), or even religious people in general. Even "rationalists" can do it.
Now, to change the subject and hopefully put an end to the little game of dozens we've got going on here, let me say something that it is just possible you and I might agree on. On another thread about Rosie O'Donnell I made the point that Western leftists who look on America's native Heartland Fundamentalists as subhuman monsters even when they do nothing but simply believe what they do will look the other way, excuse, apologize for, and defend the most heineous acts if it is committed by a member of a group which they arbitrarily define as "the other." Even if you share Ms. O'Donnell's lack of religious beliefs I trust you are disgusted not only by her economic beliefs but by her blatant hypocrisy on this subject.
May we, on this one tiny issue and this alone, at least agree that we have something in common and bid one another good night?
Theocrats must have an awful lot of time on their hands. They hang around for hours to make posts like -- "-- one of the prime purposes of government is to enforce G-d's laws and restrain man's evil inclinations --".
Gotta love the irony of posting anti-constitutional "nyah-nyah" on a site dedicated to constitutional restoration.
Okay, we've heard from tpaine. Who's next? I'm sure if a few more of you take the time to insult me you will change my mind.
Where's my "insult"? Commenting on the irony inherent in your remarks is not insulting, and I have no intent to 'change your mind' as I find you amusing as is..
C'mon, this is important! We're only at 400+ posts. We need a few more hundred more that make no point whatsoever other than to tell me I'm wrong.
Well, at least you're admitting that your post can be seen as amusingly wrong-headed. -- That's a start.
The sheer number of posts alone will eventually do the trick. I think it's about time for Carolina Guitarman to make the mutually exclusive claims that 1)the world has no meaning and 2)an absolutely objective moral standard nevertheless exists.
Bizarre comment. -- Why should any of us care what you think about what CGman might claim?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.