To: DB
Yep. Check the article. What the author is trying to do is take God out of the equation and find some logical, objective, concrete reason why humans have rights.
5 posted on
05/30/2011 3:43:11 AM PDT by
1010RD
(First, Do No Harm)
To: 1010RD
Behind all the erudite gobbledygook, it looks like a dog chasing his own tail.
To: 1010RD
From wiki: However, there is no consensus as to the precise nature of what in particular should or should not be regarded as a human right in any of the preceding senses, and the abstract concept of human rights has been a subject of intense philosophical debate and criticism.
Without a natural order and God, there is no objective basis for rights. Note that since progressiveness must disturb the natural order to “change” it, progressives cannot recognize any rights.
To: 1010RD
Yeah, no mention of God or St. Thomas Aquinas.
The comments that follow are amusing. Liberal knuckle-headed navel gazers ask themselves and each other questions that were answered by Aquinas 800 years ago.
I know this, government has no “right” to the fruits of my labor.
34 posted on
05/30/2011 6:17:58 AM PDT by
Jacquerie
(It is only in the context of Natural Law that our Declaration and Constitution form a coherent means)
To: 1010RD
the author is trying to do is take God out of the equation and find some logical, objective, concrete reason why humans have rights. Yep, and doing that doesn't work very well.
49 posted on
05/30/2011 7:37:26 PM PDT by
DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis
(Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
To: 1010RD
"Yep. Check the article. What the author is trying to do is take God out of the equation and find some logical, objective, concrete reason why humans have rights."
Yes, you are correct. He believes in natural rights (which is good), however he does not want to attribute that to a gift from our creator as Jefferson and our founders did. It's the missing thread that will forever make his logical avenues to his end weak and able to be attacked.
Yet, we have people on our own side who want to take those social God type issues out of the public square of discussion during the election campaign (ala the Mitch Daniels wing)
To: 1010RD
A distinction without a difference. People never found it difficult to justify slavery, genocide, etc, as “God’s Will”.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson