Where do rights come from?

[2A_Tom]

Do you actually have a Jefferson bible or did you just white out the miracles and His claim to deity.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Do tell. This seems like an interesting avenue for discussion.

One example:
If it's a natural right to be free, then the Bible would condemn slavery completely. FULL STOP. Since the Bible sets out rules on how a master should treat his slaves, it seems kinda obvious that the moral right of liberty is a Biblically shared concept.

 

[Jludo]

Do you actually have a Jefferson bible or did you just white out the miracles and His claim to deity.

I've got a Jefferson bible, much shorter, along with a new international version and the bible according the mark Twain, which is also a great read.

Doesn't someone send a copy of the jefferson bible to every new member of Congress? I wonder how many just stick it on their shelves not realizing how blasphemous it is. Then again I'd trust Jefferson to edit down the bible for me as much as I trust the priests at the council of nicea.

 

[Jludo]

Didn't Moses already take care of that?

After reading through some of this thread I think people get confused when thinking that government grants rights. What the government does is steal your rights and then try to sell them back to you in the form of licenses and permits. Some confuse this theft as granting of rights which it obviously is not.

The problem then is how do you get people to respect one anothers rights in this state of nature?

 

[Wolfhound]

The problem then is how do you get people to respect one anothers rights in this state of nature?

Well, I am not saying that laws and some amount of government isn't necessary. Laws can be used to protect rights but they can also go too far and violate rights. Where and when that line is crossed is certainly open for debate.

Edit: The Founding Fathers realized that government was a necessary evil. The brilliant solution was to set up our constitution to limit government control over the people and not by limiting the people's rights.

 

[jamil]

Emphatically, no. The difference between a right and a privilege is not mere semantics; it is the fundamental question under discussion. Conflating the two merely serves to confuse the discussion.

It’s not a conflation. Words can have different meanings. Homonyms aren’t a conflation. It’s whether you chose to refer to definition 1, or definition 2 in a dictionary. You’re arbitrarily constraining the choice to just one of them. So your “by definition...” declaration above depends on which definition you’re applying.

 

[jamil]

I am using the same understanding of "right" as was written in the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."



Not if rights are an endowment from our Creator, they cannot. They can only be respected or violated.

Your assertion is only true if rights are a creation of humans in the first place - and we are right back to what must be a binary view of rights: either they are an endowment from a Supreme Being or else they are a human creation.

Again, if “rights” always mean inalienable, then saying inalienable is redundant and unnecessary. But what kind of rights are we talking about? The inalienable kind, not the kind HBIC’s grant.

 

[jamil]

There is no basis for rights without God.

If God did not give us life, then we are no more than a lump of cells that can be aborted by those who want to.

If you believe in natural rights, look at Chicago or any other city over run with thugs.

If you are athiest all you can hope for is that your gang is stronger and better armed than all of the other gangs.

The TV show Revolution was a good example of society left to its own ends.

ETA: 3 dead 12 hurt at Garlic Festival, 9 dead 39 wounded in Chicago

That’s a claim completely without basis. Fictional TV shows aren't exemplary evidence.

 

[jamil]

There's no basis for anything without God, because everything in existence can be attributed to him. But to say God endorses "rights" isn't quite correct. The Bible itself actually contradicts the idea of what we consider rights.

No basis for anything without god? That’s circular reasoning.

 

[jamil]

So, you have no rights, only privileges granted by society?

The secular basis for natural rights is objective morality.

 

[Wolfhound]

.

 

[Kutnupe14]

No basis for anything without god? That’s circular reasoning.

Right. It's a infinite concept.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The secular basis for natural rights is objective morality.

Now you're coming along.

 

[2A_Tom]

The secular basis for natural rights is objective morality.

There is no objective morality.

I gave several examples of civilizations that had a variety of beliefs that are opposed to what we call rights.

Morality is whatever the majority/strong say it is at the time.

It is survival of the fittest.

When the lights go out the strongest best armed will impose their morality on you. Spend a couple of years in prison and tell me about objective morality. You may be the object of interest to someone.

 

[jamil]

Right. It's a infinite concept.

Yeah. And not a logical, nor evident one.

 

[Brad69]

So I am more confused than normal!

Does the government tell us what our rights are?

Does the deity or deity’s tell us our rights?

Does the natural law of the wild gives us our rights?

 

[Wolfhound]

 

[2A_Tom]

Is there a right to life?

 

[jamil]

Now you're coming along.

Not coming along. I’ve been saying that all along. God isn’t required for the existence of the concept of human morality. The belief that God is required as the source of all rights is dogma.

But look. I really hate these kinds of religious discussions that touch on belief or non-belief. I’m not a rabid atheist. I’m more of an agnostic, live and let live kind of person. You believe in God, good for you. Be the best Christian you can be. I applaud you for your convictions and sticking to them. Christianity is a beautiful religion. But it’s just not what I believe. And I don’t need to try to convince you that you shouldn’t believe either, like so many atheists do. I have zero interest in that. So I stay away from the religious threead, because of that.

But now we’re talking about rights, which I like to talk about So I’m put in the position to argue along the lines if the existence of God, when you try to make the claim that there can be no rights without God. That’s simply not evident.

 

[jamil]

There is no objective morality.

I gave several examples of civilizations that had a variety of beliefs that are opposed to what we call rights.

Morality is whatever the majority/strong say it is at the time.

It is survival of the fittest.

When the lights go out the strongest best armed will impose their morality on you. Spend a couple of years in prison and tell me about objective morality. You may be the object of interest to someone.

There are plenty of examples of moral foundations which exist in pretty much all cultures.

Calling it “survival of the fittest” is a strawman representation of the theory of evolution as the origin of life. And there’s no circular reasoning needed for it to explain us.