Should God be replaced? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Solon who wrote (17319)	4/29/2004 11:32:33 AM
From: Greg or e	Read Replies (1) of 28931

T h a n k y o u "You stated that All humans have an innate sense of right and wrong." Righto I did not say it was proof so there goes your premise. "You made it clear that millions of Germans were being immoral." No actually I was pointing out that if your system was true then there was nothing wrong with what they did to the Jews. I would like you to show me why you would impose your values on a sovereign nation that decided to kill a certain portion of their population for whatever reason they decided. "the State which grants those rights and it is the State that provides police and military to safeguard those rights." What the State grants the State can take away. What's your objection to the Nazi State doing just that? "<<<<Trying to make a document that explicitly grounds "inherent rights" in God into some sort of atheist manifesto is.... well; you can't be serious?>>>>" "Get real! The Constitution does not mention God, and as I said...it is not written by God. It is written by humans." Did I say Constitution? I was talking about the "Declaration of Independence" being Canadian I may have used the wrong title. Anywho.. "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." "whether Jefferson inserted it in the Declaration for conscientious or for pragmatic reasons is irrelevant." Come on be serious. The premise of the very rights we are talking about is explicitly based on a self evident truth. If you want to deny the premise then the conclusion cannot be validated. Therefore rights cannot be unalienable, they are just the opinion of those people at that time and have no authority over us.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next