Replies

I'm not sure I appreciate the distinction between "rights" and "privileges" to the same extent that you do. It seems to me that the fundamental difference between the two is that the former is vouchsafed every person as a birthright, where the latter is dispensed by the hand of the collective.

If I've got that correct, then I would agree that attributing our liberties to the less-than-divine authorship of men subjects them to revocation by the same whim. Whereas an innate set of rights inherent in our spiritual legacy means that only a Divine Creator can alter our freedoms.

In other words, if our rights come from God, we don't have to ask the State for permission to exercise them. If not, then the State IS God.

I know which world I want to live in ...

[ In other words, if our rights come from God, we don't have to ask the State for permission to exercise them. If not, then the State IS God. ]

Thats what I mean, also, by rights vs. privledges..
I think thats why the founders used the word rights instead of the word privledges expicitly for that purpose.. The two words mean such different things.. Amazing that lawyers who make their living parseing words would miss this.. And the difference in the meaning of these two words exactly displays the difference in the American political system and ALL other political systems.. to this day..

Maybe the American system is indeed a Theocracy..
For if, our rights don't come from God, then who.?.
Of Course they do come from God.. its just matter of which God.. Keeping in mind that the "State itself " can be deemed a God.. or the Enviorment(Gaia), or Humanity itself, or so many other pseudo-Gods.. or Demi-Gods.. There are proponets for all those and more.. Maybe the founders were not wise to not specify WHICH God.. Unless they felt that if we got confused on who God was, as a people, it was already too late.. In my way of thinking they would be correct and barring some heroic re-arraignment(revolution) we're "Plucked" like a turkey for thanksgiving..