The very idea that human beings have individual rights not subject to the whims of an earthly monarch, but subject to the laws of Yahweh, is directly from Moses.
Returning to Plato's Euthyphro, Socrates advanced the argument that piety to the gods is impossible if the gods all want different things...
Morality is impossible, because all humans have different morals... Claims of morality is sophistry without some higher power defining what it is...
Morality and all of its associated ideals are rooted entirely in the presupposition some higher power defines what is correct for human behavior.
But, since we are all properly obeying the * modern interpretation * of the First Amendment, good & evil isn't the question... Good & bad, right & wrong, etc., etc., ad nausea; are all inherently religious ideals.
The modern interpretation of the First Amendment (according to the liberal-tarians) says government must exorcise all traces of religion and theism from itself. Therefore, government must never consider issues of morality and right and wrong...
So, it becomes a question of benefits versus costs. Fetus killing has its benefits to society, especially if you like to sleep late on Saturdays. But it also has its costs as well. Society (by which I mean, whoever manages to seize power) needs to evaluate these costs and decide accordingly.
The mythical rights of men and women are also meaningless. The very concept of rights is also founded in religion. Since the enlightened person is freed from any superstitions about some "God," they are free from having to worry about "rights." Only raw power counts and humans are just meat puppets for the powerful...
Was Freudian psychoanalytic theory of sexual stages in psychological development more accurate than accredited?
The Michael Jackson Complex is fixation on mutilation of and deviance with human anatomy in the media. It is a social psychosis catering to the lowest common denominator and generated with Pavlovian behavioral conditioning in popular culture.
Should we really be canonizing special societal privileges in the law based on idolatrous fetishes? Disability, welfare, Social Security, etc., etc., ad nausea...
The social psychosis generated by behavioral conditioning (Pavlov's salivating dogs) in the popular culture and the conditioned response to accept the false premises of mental illness or birth defect will be used as a political tool to systematically rob the public purse. Then, we could have other self-inflicted mental illness and disease (aside from those we already do) subsidized by the government consolidating an ever increasing portion of the economy in the hands of the cultural Marxists.
"...to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them... that all men are created... Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world... with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence..."
Not this s**t again...Do you honestly go from thread to thread looking for ways to interject your beliefs that everything comes from god?
Humans have rights not because of some imaginary being, but because they have the ability to communicate and reason with each other. If I wish to pass through your property I am free to ask and you are free to allow or deny. We associate freely with each other or not due to our ability to communicate and reason with each other. Those who cannot or will not use reason are either mentally ill or criminal. In either case, we typically attempt treatment or rehabilitation and failing that, we confine and control. In the latter, we sometimes execute depending on the offense.
Morality and all of its associated ideals are rooted entirely in the presupposition some higher power defines what is correct for human behavior.
I've already addressed this on another thread - Repeating it here, and on every thread to which you post, still doesn't make it a fact. You believe that were it not for a mythical supreme being lording over them with the threat of being thrown into a lake of fire for all eternity as punishment, all christians would turn into murdering, raping, lying, cheating, stealing thugs. I happen to have a higher opinion of them than you apparently.
The mythical rights of men and women are also meaningless. The very concept of rights is also founded in religion.
As I stated previously, the concept of rights is founded on reason, not religion.
The founders, many of whom were Deists and not fundamentalist christians, based their governmental beliefs on reason - The reasoned musings of guys like Frederick Bastiat and John Locke. Thomas Jefferson even went so far as to take the bible and extract only the teachings of Jesus, which he viewed as the finest moral blueprint, leaving behind the supernatural aspects, which he believed to be hogwash. The end product is called the Jefferson Bible and is availalbe in many places on the web for free.
Per Jefferson, he was rescuing the Philosophy of Jesus and the "pure principles which he taught" from the "artificial vestments in which they have been muffled by priests, who have travestied them into various forms as instruments of riches and power for themselves."
"...to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them... that all men are created... Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world... with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence..."
You will note of course, the he first mentions the "Laws of Nature" and then "Nature's God." Think about Jefferson and realize how many different iterations he and Franklin went through when writing the Declaration and tell me why he specifically chose those words...Also tell me what you think "Supreme Judge of the world" meant - I assume you believe they meant god - They did not. The Declaration was written specifically to the other civilized nations of the world so they would understand why we started a war with Britian.
Regards,
Col Sanders