Replies

Actually, I was not arguing with anyone. I was trying to understand the logic behind a belief that Constitutional rights are God given when there is little to support such a claim. I stopped responding to you because it was obvious that you were not one willing to examine why you believed such is true and attempt to explain the rational deduction. This opinion was indeed verified you your latest post. You have little to offer me in the form of insight as you simply ignore the question by claiming that the Constitution confers no rights. ”It simply acknowledges those rights as pre-existing” This is convenient but totally unenlightening and I might say, very Clintonesque.

The truth is that the Constitution doesn’t say that those rights are preexisting – anywhere. Yet there are many that insist that the rights are God given. When I ask what those God given rights are, they say look at the Bill of Rights. When I quote from the Bill of Rights, they say well… those are not REALLY rights; those are “acknowledgements” of rights. I guess it depends on what you mean by the word “is” (such as, the government IS the people).

I was trying to understand the logic behind a belief that Constitutional rights are God given when there is little to support such a claim. I stopped responding to you because it was obvious that you were not one willing to examine why you believed such is true and attempt to explain the rational deduction.

You are either lying here, or mistaken. That is not why you stopped responding to me, because you and I were not discussing "God-given rights" in the first place.

We were discussing the Fourth Amendment vs. Article IV. Remember?

You have little to offer me in the form of insight as you simply ignore the question by claiming that the Constitution confers no rights.

If you don't like the cold, hard truth that the Constitution "confers" no rights (and it is the truth), then why do you ask about it?

”It simply acknowledges those rights as pre-existing” This is convenient but totally unenlightening

Sorry you feel that way. But, it is the truth. I cannot and will not alter the truth in order that you may find it "more enlightening". How "enlightening" would it be for me to lie to you, anyway?

The rights mentioned in the Constitution are treated as pre-existing. That's the truth. Read it and you'll see what I mean.

Again I'm sorry you don't think this fact is "enlightening" but there you have it.

and I might say, very Clintonesque.

The truth and "Clintonesque" have nothing to do with each other, so I don't know what you are talking about.

The truth is that the Constitution doesn’t say that those rights are preexisting – anywhere.

It doesn't say it, no. It also doesn't say that "the people are pre-existing". That doesn't mean that people didn't exist until the Constitution was written. It just mentions "the people", because it is understood that people are pre-existing and are not somehow created by the Constitution.

Same goes for rights.

When I ask what those God given rights are, they say look at the Bill of Rights. When I quote from the Bill of Rights, they say well… those are not REALLY rights; those are “acknowledgements” of rights.

No, they are really rights. The Second Amendment speaks of "the right to keep and bear arms", and that really is a right. So, what are you talking about?

I guess it depends on what you mean by the word “is” (such as, the government IS the people).

Are you a member of the government? Are you a person?

Your answers to those two questions had better be the same; otherwise you contradict yourself (again) by claiming "the government IS the people". Let me know.