CHRIS COMO: "OUR RIGHTS DON NOT COME FROM GOD"

[Whirlaway]

I thought you were trying to explain the Como quote. You made that clear in your very 1st post when you stepped up and tried to make some logic out of what Como said, indicating you and Como are like minded...in fact, your own quote in your very 1st post is "like he (Como) says".....but if now you are backtracking on trying to explain Como's statement...fine by me.

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Why do I give a shit what he said? Goddamn, you think we're tied at the hip? I don't have to agree or disagree with the guy. I've got my own fucking ideas on it. How's that?

[Whirlaway]

Thanks Hermosa; best response yet. You made me go back and refocus on "endowed by their Creator."

Originally Posted by Hermosa

Fumo is a typical Liberial silly thinker! To understand the Constitution, you have to learn the basic understanding or philosophical principle that was the basis for what they wrote. That my friends is found in the Preamble of the Constitution. It says, " all men are created equal, and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that of life, liberty, and the per suit of happiness!
Now, getting past the typical arguments used to fight against this basic idea, understand "men" as meaning mankind, and reference to a creator, (many were Diests which believed if there was a God, he isn't involved with us), what was the basis for everything that follows, ie. The Constitution. It states that we have (not are given by others, unalieneable( non disputed, not apart from who we are) rights. It's our life to do and be what we choose! Liberty is not something that comes because we are given permission by some higher governing authority. Happiness is what I think. I have a right to be happy, to persue those things that make me happy!
Now, two points need to clearly be understood. First, Because of this belief that we are capable and empowered with these rights, no governing authority has any authority to take these rights from us. Thus, the checks and balances to limit the power of the Government. Secondly, within this basic understanding of who we are as a person, it is expected that we have the capability and maturity that our rights do not infringe on the rights of the other. In other words, as I have these unalienable rights, so do every other person I come in contact with. It's the old principle of "treating others like you want others to treat you". With mutual respect and a expectation of interacting with a rational person.
I think the most basic problem in this country today is missing and not teaching and promoting these very essential expectations. The result is we have a bunch of spoiled, self centered, childish attitudes and behaviors amount too many people, and a lot of politicians on both sides of the isle, who think they have the right to rule us.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

You made me go back and refocus on

I thought you trying to tell us that you plan to "go back and refocus on"

WISCONSIN & AMERICA ARE TRENDING ROMNEY!

As your revered Patriarch would say, "Carry On" Trendy.

[Yssup Rider]

The irony is, well, ironic.

Guess what, JDIdiot, Nature thinks you're a dipshit!

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Thanks Hermosa; best response yet. You made me go back and refocus on "endowed by their Creator."

So because man said it, it must be true. Do you also believe in talking snakes and virgin birth? Did man not have inalienable rights until some old white men wrote it down? Preposterous.

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

I thought you were trying to explain the Como quote. You made that clear in your very 1st post when you stepped up and tried to make some logic out of what Como said, indicating you and Como are like minded...in fact, your own quote in your very 1st post is "like he (Como) says".....but if now you are backtracking on trying to explain Como's statement...fine by me.

Ever heard of playing Devils advocate? I can argue from a position I don't necessarily agree with. I know. You're mind is blown right now but calm down, take a deep breath and you'll be ok. I don't believe in God so therefore I don't believe our rights come from him. I also believe that freedom existed before some old white men wrote it down. Of course if you weren't white you were only 2/3 but you knew that right

[Yssup Rider]

Thirty six posts about COMO!

[Yssup Rider]

Oye COMO va!

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by bigtex

Another mindless, non-sensical rant from the King of mindless, non-sensical rants.

YOU ARE A LIAR TAMPON AND A WELCHER. Easy enough to read. You can't win an argument and you don't pay on bets that you lose. You've even said that you don't believe half the stuff you post. So who are you....Barack Obama or maybe Joe Biden?

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

you don't pay on bets that you lose.

Wanna bet?

Put your money where your mouth is and find out!

[Hermosa]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

So because man said it, it must be true. Do you also believe in talking snakes and virgin birth? Did man not have inalienable rights until some old white men wrote it down? Preposterous.

The need to react rather than think rationally seems to be the common thread in the responses here! The Constitution was a principal that was written based on a philosophical principal as set forth in the Preamble. That philosophical principal was formulated because of the philosophies and principals understood by many earlier beliefs about our plac n this world. Not "because some old white guy said anything". The very comment reflects a very bigoted and shallow historical perspective. Typical based on the mindless teaching going on today. Throughout all written history, this cry for. Value has been present. Just as evident, is the idea that some think they are a little better or above somebody else because of status, education, class, might and so forth.
You can chose to believe whatever you want to guy. That is your unalienable right! However, in a community or society, mutual respect and understanding each ones worth, I think is much more beneficial. Never going to be perfect, but the principals, can spark within us a desire for a better cooperation. Regardless of your opinion anyway, I was simply expressing the basis for the writing of the Constitution. Something most modern students and new age liberals like Cumo, seem very ignorant of. Thus, they think they are the few who should rule the many. He reminds me of the old story "The Emperiors New Clothes"

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by Hermosa

The need to react rather than think rationally seems to be the common thread in the responses here! The Constitution was a principal that was written based on a philosophical principal as set forth in the Preamble. That philosophical principal was formulated because of the philosophies and principals understood by many earlier beliefs about our plac n this world. Not "because some old white guy said anything". The very comment reflects a very bigoted and shallow historical perspective. Typical based on the mindless teaching going on today. Throughout all written history, this cry for. Value has been present. Just as evident, is the idea that some think they are a little better or above somebody else because of status, education, class, might and so forth.
You can chose to believe whatever you want to guy. That is your unalienable right! However, in a community or society, mutual respect and understanding each ones worth, I think is much more beneficial. Never going to be perfect, but the principals, can spark within us a desire for a better cooperation. Regardless of your opinion anyway, I was simply expressing the basis for the writing of the Constitution. Something most modern students and new age liberals like Cumo, seem very ignorant of. Thus, they think they are the few who should rule the many. He reminds me of the old story "The Emperiors New Clothes"

Thank you for allowing me to believe what I want. I was waiting till you conferred. Don't assume you know anything about me, firstly. Where did the philosophical PRINCIPLES (not principals, as you wrote. the second instance was spelled correctly, assuming you're referring to the people involved. If not, you misspelled that one as well) come from? Some old white men, just like I said. It's not a limited or shallow historical perspective. It's a realistic understanding of what really happened. I don't sweep things under the rug because they're historically unfortunate or make people uncomfortable. And you make my point for me. Throughout history, man has yearned to be free. The constitution didn't invent freedom. I've taken law classes. I don't need the constitution explained to me, but thanks.

[JD Barleycorn]

And Obama "taught" constitutional law. So what's your point?

[CuteOldGuy]

"Endowed by their Creator" leaves open who the Creator is. It was written that way on purpose. You can believe it is God, Nature, or even yourself. The point is that humans have rights because humans exist. Those rights are inherent in your existence. They are not conferred by any government or other tribunal. Therefore, they cannot be taken away without violating you basic human rights. The purpose of government is to protect those rights, not create them. Those rights existed before government.

[Whirlaway]

Yes. Bingo.

Tell it to Como, he thinks they come frlm man acting collectively..

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

"Endowed by their Creator" leaves open who the Creator is. It was written that way on purpose. You can believe it is God, Nature, or even yourself. The point is that humans have rights because humans exist. Those rights are inherent in your existence. They are not conferred by any government or other tribunal. Therefore, they cannot be taken away without violating you basic human rights. The purpose of government is to protect those rights, not create them. Those rights existed before government.