NationStates Jolt Archive

I was rummaging through my computer and found these notes for the book I am writing.

Only a democratic society can ensure the equality before the law of its members. Thomas Jefferson to the Republicans in 1809


Man is by nature a rational being endowed with rights and an a basic sense of justice by nature. Jefferson in 1823

A free people claim their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrates or their neighbors. Jefferson
Rights of British America 1774

In a legal argument upheld in court in 1770, Jefferson argued: Under the law of nature, all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own will. This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the author of nature, because it is necessary for his own sustenance.


In a discussion with James Madison Jefferson wrote the rights of the whole can be no more than the sum of the rights of the individuals. 1789


Nothing is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man. jefferson 1824

The evidence of the natural right of expatriation, like that of our right to life, liberty, the use of our faculties, the pursuit of happiness, is not left to to the feeble and sophistical investigations of reason, but is impressed on the sense of every man. We do not claim these under the charters of kings or legislators, but under the king of kings, Jesus Christ. Jefferson 1817
Proof the Jefferson believed that we derive our rights from God and not from the government or community of man.

Speaking to James Monroe Jefferson wrote in 1797: Natural rights are the objects for the protection of which society is formed and municipal laws established.

Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Thomas Jefferson: Opinion on French Treaties 1793

Questions of natural right are triable by their conformity with the moral sense and reason of man. Jefferson on french treaties 1793

The Declaration of Independence is the declaratory charter of our rights, and the rights of all mankind. Thomas Jefferson speaking to Samuel Adams Wells 1819


Some other natural rights have not yet entered into any declaration of rights. (but they will eventually) Jefferson 1813

The nature of American government rests on the inherit inalienability of the rights of the people and of each individual composing the mass that we call society.

The best principles of which our Republic secure to all its citizens a perfect equality of rights. Jefferson 1809 replying to the citizens of Wilmington

In a 1795 letter to the frenchman, Francois D'Ivernois Jefferson wrote "It is to secure our rights that we have government at all."


In 1816 Jefferson said that the idea that we give up our rights by choosing to live in society is completely unfounded.


In a 1774 pamphlet titled "Rights of British America", Jefferson wrote "These are rights which God has given equally and independently to all.

Belief in the natural rights of mankind is not confined to American patriots. Indeed, frenchman Montesquieu, writing in his book "Spirit of the Laws" said " In the state of nature, indeed, all men are born equal; but they cannot continue in this equality. Society makes them lose it, and they can recover it only by the protection of the laws." That this was written before the declaration of independence is evidenced that Jefferson and other founders qouted from it.

Jefferson predicted Modern America:
In 1782, he wrote "The spirit of the times may alter, and will alter. Our rulers will become corrupt, and our people careless. This will enable a single zealot to incite the masses to persecute better men. It can never be too often repeated that the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is while our rulers are honest and ourselves united. From the conclusion of its war for independence, a nation naturally begins going downhill. At such times, it is not necessary to resort to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. And the situation will get worse and worse until either those rights are revived or abolished all together."
This statement by Jefferson is a very prophetic veiw of modern America in which the people are willing to give up their natural rights in return for quick buck.

Traveling in France in 1787, Jefferson wrote "What a cruel reflection that a rich country cannot long be a free one." Again, prophetic of modern America where businesses, corporations, and special interest groups have rights that outweigh those of the average american.

Warning against the use of military force to impose democracy on others:
Explaining American democracy to LaFayette in 1815, Jefferson wrote that if liberty does not take root and growth in the progress of reason, but is instead imposed by force, it becomes a tryanny of the many, the few, or the one with which to oppress those whose behavior they disagree with. This is the result of imposing freedom on those unprepared for it.

Jefferson wrote that natural rights can only be regulated only insofar as we give them consent to do so.
I for one do not consent.

In a letter to Noah Webster, creator of the first dictionary, Jefferson wrote "It had become an universal and almost uncontroversial position in the several states, that the purposes of society do not require a surrender of all our rights to our ordinary governors; that there are certain portions of right not necessary to enable them to carry on an effective government, and which experience has already proven they will be constantly encroaching upon, if submitted to them; that there are also certain fences which experience has proved peculiarly effective against wrong, and rarely obstructive of right, which yet the governing powers have ever shown a disposition to weaken and remove. Of the first kind we freedom of religion; of the second kind we have trial by jury, habeas corpus laws, and freedom of the press. " 1790

If we are made in some degree for others, yet in a greater degree are we made for ourselves. It were contrary to feeling and indeed ridiculous to suppose that a man has less rights in himself than one of his neighbors, or all of them put together. This would be slavery, and not that liberty which the bill of rights has made inviolable, and for the preservation of which our government has been charged." 1782

In a letter to frenchman Pierre Samuel Dupont De Nemours in 1816 "No one has the right to obstruct another exercising his faculties innocently for the relief of sensibilites made a part of his nature."
No one has the right to ban someone from praying or singing religious songs in a public place or in the work place or in school.

The same God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the use of force may destroy them but it cannot break our spirit. Jefferson
Rights of British America 1774

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending to small a degree of it. Jefferson 1791

The giver of life gave it for happiness and not for wretchedness. Jefferson to Monroe 1782
wrethedness=immorality

Perfect happiness, I believe, was never intended by the Deity to be the lot of one his creatures in this world; but that he has very much put in our power the nearness of our approaches to it, is what I as steadfastly believe." Jefferson 1763

If God has made it a law in the nature of man to pursue his own happiness, He has left him free in the choice of place as well as mode, and we may safely call on the whole body of English jurists to produce the map on which nature has traced for each individual the geographical line which she forbids him to cross in pursuit of happiness. Jefferson to John Manners 1817 applies to local level and freedom of movement

John Locke: humans by nature are rational and good. As they enter into community or society, they keep the same rights they had before they entered into political society. Among these rights were the right to freedom of worship, the right to a voice in their governance, and the right to property ownership.

Other unalienable natural rights that people have:

Freedom of correspondence
Freedom of Conscience
Personal liberty (freedom of movement)
the right of expatriation (right to expell people from the us)
Equal right to succeed on our own terms
Equal right to respect and honor from our fellow citizens
Free toleration of manners foreign to our own
freedom from ex post facto laws, they are unjust and unconstitutional in civil as well as criminal courts
Equal treatment under the law regardless of income


The constitutional freedom of religion is the most inalienable and sacred of all human rights. 1819

Religion, as well as reason, confirms the soundness of those principles on which our government has been founded and its rights asserted. Jefferson 1815

One of the amendments to the Constitution expressly declares that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, thereby guarding in the same sentence and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press; insomuch that whatever violates either throws down the sanctuary which covers the others. Jefferson 1798

I have ever thought religion a concern purely between our God and our consciences, for which we are accountable to him, and not to the priests. Jefferson 1816

From the dissensions among sects themselves arise necessarily a right of choosing and necessity of deliberating to which we will conform. But if we choose for ourselves, we must allow others to choose also, as reciprocally, this establishes religious liberty. Jefferson 1776

added more notes.

*ignores the right to remain silent*

the course of history shows that theocracys never work out, it is infact a way of regulating people's actions, and a way for the government to grow, with support of people, this is how good people have allowed evil people to rise into power, in which they will take away peoples liberties, which is general enslavement
"The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." Thomas Jefferson
The only role our government should have is to protect our civil rights, thats it, nothing else.

the course of history shows that theocracys never work out, it is infact a way of regulating people's actions, and a way for the government to grow, with support of people, this is how good people have allowed evil people to rise into power, in which they will take away peoples liberties, which is general enslavement
"The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." Thomas Jefferson
The only role our government should have is to protect our civil rights, thats it, nothing else.
you mean political rights.

ummmm

wouldnt the concepts of our rights transcend the government that "gives" them to us?

By definition aren't they something that we have always and will always have?

Human Rights, things like the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man, transcend time.

As you can see by the bold, Jefferson directly states that we derive our rights directly from God.

you mean political rights.i mean both

As you can see by the bold, Jefferson directly states that we derive our rights directly from God.

thanks

ummmm

wouldnt the concepts of our rights transcend the government that "gives" them to us?

By definition aren't they something that we have always and will always have?

Human Rights, things like the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man, transcend time.
Yes, unless God takes them away.
The UDRM, one must be careful of qouting, cause it states that it is a human rights violation for parents to spank or otherwise punish their own children for doing something wrong.

As you can see by the bold, Jefferson directly states that we derive our rights directly from God.Jefferson was a smart man. but he knew giving the church right to run the government would give the government to much power, Britain was a monarchy/theocracy, and its a dictatorships we were trying to move away from

"The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." Thomas Jefferson
The only role our government should have is to protect our civil rights, thats it, nothing else.

Works for me. Okay, you can add political rights to that, though I don't know that Jefferson would argue that political rights are derived from God in quite the same way as civil ones are.

Political rights are only valuable in so far as they protect civil rights.

Jefferson was a smart man. but he knew giving the church right to run the government would give the government to much power, Britain was a monarchy/theocracy, and its a dictatorships we were trying to move away from
A theocracy has been proven, by world history, to be just as bad as any other non democratic government.
Where you have theocracy, communism, secularism (Turkey, Algeria), ethnicism, dictatorship, militarism, direct democracy, and the like, you have gross and total violations of the natural rights of the individuals.

A theocracy has been proven, by world history,

Only when the power of the "theocracy" is in the hands of humans. Unfortunately, we don't have a good ongoing example of a true "theocracy" in history. Even the Jewish nation when directly ruled by God, were disobedient to His laws and as a result evil happened.

im just simply wanthing to say is that religion has no place in politics, it will break up politics and it will break up churches with disagreements, and different interpretations. That is why i believe in a government only role should be to protect our civil rights, and our political rights, and the only time the government should interfere is when someones civil, or political rights are being violated.

more stuff:

As all persons are held innocent until they shall have been declared guilty, if arrest shall be deemed indispensable, all harshness not essential to the securing of the prisoner's person shall be severely repressed by law.

No one shall be disquieted on account of his opinions, including his religious views

The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom,

property is an inviolable and sacred right
by The Marquis de Lafayette

"There are rights which it is useless to surrender to the government and which governments have yet always been found to invade. These are the rights of thinking and publishing our thoughts by speaking or writing; the right of free commerce; the right to personal freedom"
E Dumbauld, (ed) The Political Writings of Thomas Jefferson (New York, 1955) p 57.

The Deity, from the relations we stand in to Himself and to each other, has constituted an eternal and immutable law...Upon this law depend the natural rights of mankind ..."
R B Morris, (ed) Alexander Hamilton and the Founding of the Nation (New York, 1957) p 9.

As you can see by the bold, Jefferson directly states that we derive our rights directly from God.


You have to be careful in referring to God since he has not been proven to exist, he is simply an idea at this time. So Jefferson directly states that we derived our rights directly from the idea of God. Therefore Jefferson simply derived ideas from an idea. That idea bearing the question of, "Is there a god?". However he wanted the nation to be free of forced religion, and so it is more likely to say he wanted to force the notion of "God", since "God" was looked upon as somebody who enforced good will and good morals. Plus, considering most everyone at the time was religious, him using a religious figure in arguements would shine a lot better than just pushing out stuff based upon what he believed, and the one thing people needed at that time was something to keep them going, and the belief that one's nation is led under the wing of a supernatural being is just what could bring that along. The fact remains though, we are not a total theocracy just yet, and so we must try to remain that way.

Jefferson isn't directly saying that our rights are granted by God, he is saying that our rights are inherent, that we have them until they are taken away. With that being said, it must be assumed that if God were to have created us and this universe, then yes are rights were created by God.

Is that the point you are getting at?

You have to be careful in referring to God since he has not been proven to exist, he is simply an idea at this time. So Jefferson directly states that we derived our rights directly from the idea of God. Therefore Jefferson simply derived ideas from an idea. That idea bearing the question of, "Is there a god?". However he wanted the nation to be free of forced religion, and so it is more likely to say he wanted to force the notion of "God", since "God" was looked upon as somebody who enforced good will and good morals. Plus, considering most everyone at the time was religious, him using a religious figure in arguements would shine a lot better than just pushing out stuff based upon what he believed, and the one thing people needed at that time was something to keep them going, and the belief that one's nation is led under the wing of a supernatural being is just what could bring that along. The fact remains though, we are not a total theocracy just yet, and so we must try to remain that way.the existence of God has been proven.

the existence of God has been proven.
How about some undeniable evidence?

Jefferson isn't directly saying that our rights are granted by God, he is saying that our rights are inherent, that we have them until they are taken away. With that being said, it must be assumed that if God were to have created us and this universe, then yes are rights were created by God.

Is that the point you are getting at?
we have these rights for ever. They cannot be taken away except by God.
They are part of his law.

the existence of God has been proven.

Is this book gonna rock or what!?!

How about some undeniable evidence?
The life, death, and ressurection of Jesus Christ.

The life, death, and ressurection of Jesus Christ.Do you even know how th bible came about?

we have these rights for ever. They cannot be taken away except by God.
They are part of his law.

So the government is free to take away rights, if it is deemed the work of God?

The life, death, and ressurection of Jesus Christ.

Prove the third part of that.

Do you even know how th bible came about?
IT is the direct word of God. And the ressurection of Christ is not just recorded in the Bible but in other documents from the time, such as the works of Josephus.

Jefferson isn't directly saying that our rights are granted by God, he is saying that our rights are inherent, that we have them until they are taken away. With that being said, it must be assumed that if God were to have created us and this universe, then yes are rights were created by God.

Is that the point you are getting at?

Jefferson is actually saying that God gave us the rights, that they are derived from Him as creator. He'd probably argue in favor of your right to disagree with Him about where those rights came from, but he clearly believed they were derived from the Deity as did most of our founding fathers. That doesn't me you have to or that the country has to, but they did and they founded this country under that assumption.

The life, death, and ressurection of Jesus Christ.

Jury's still out on that one. Less than 1/3rd of the world's population believes that. Quorum has not been acheived.

So the government is free to take away rights, if it is deemed the work of God?
Nay. That would be the government claiming to be God. Which would make it antichrist.

The life, death, and ressurection of Jesus Christ.

i would like proof of the latter of those three claims

IT is the direct word of God. And the ressurection of Christ is not just recorded in the Bible but in other documents from the time, such as the works of Josephus.

the Quran is the Direct word of Allah....

hmmmm

i think we have a metaphysical paradox...

we need like rock em sock em gods.

Interesting post, and you had me for a while (Liberty is my greatest concern, and the lack thereof)...
Until I read the newsflash about undeniable evidence in favor of God's existence.
Why was this missed by the media, both conservative and liberal???
Please provide a link to a major news source.

the Quran is the Direct word of Allah....

hmmmm

i think we have a metaphysical paradox...

we need like rock em sock em gods.
Actually Mohammad was a false prophet and islam is a false religion. The Quran did not come from God.

In the interests of full disclosure, I am a Catholic and have personal faith in the existence of God. That said....

the existence of God has been proven.
Do you mean "scientifically proven"? What is your basis for this claim? When last I checked, the existence of God had been neither scientifically proven nor disproven.

I find it difficult to believe that the existence of God has been scientifically proven. "Thou shalt not put the Lord, thy God, to the test." Yet, testing things is the basis of all science.

Okay, I'm slow.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
Founder and Delegate of The Realm of Ambrosia

Jefferson is actually saying that God gave us the rights, that they are derived from Him as creator. He'd probably argue in favor of your right to disagree with Him about where those rights came from, but he clearly believed they were derived from the Deity as did most of our founding fathers. That doesn't me you have to or that the country has to, but they did and they founded this country under that assumption.

He says that rights are natural, not God given, in most of those statements. It comes by logical deduction, that if we are created by God, that all things that are inherent would have been granted by God.

Jury's still out on that one. Less than 1/3rd of the world's population believes that. Quorum has not been acheived.

Do you have to have a Quorum accept something as a reality for it to be a reality? Another step, do you even have to have absolute proof of something for it to be a reality? Reality simply is, whether we believe it, accept it or can prove it or not.

Actually Mohammad was a false prophet and islam is a false religion. The Quran did not come from God.

do you not see how logically falacious that is?

speaking from a purly logical sence, please disprove allah in a way that does not also disprove god

Interesting post, and you had me for a while (Liberty is my greatest concern, and the lack thereof)...
Until I read the newsflash about undeniable evidence in favor of God's existence.
Why was this missed by the media, both conservative and liberal???
Please provide a link to a major news source.
And when the people were gathered thick together, he began to say, This is an evil generation: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet. Luke11:29

Actually Mohammad was a false prophet and islam is a false religion. The Quran did not come from God.

Prove it.

Jesus said, "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;" (John 14:16)

Who do you suppose that Comforter was?

He went on to say, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." (John 14:26)

Sounds like a new message a'comin'.

Can we say ... mmmmm ... Qur'an?

IT is the direct word of God. And the ressurection of Christ is not just recorded in the Bible but in other documents from the time, such as the works of Josephus.Wrong, Around the year 400 ad there was a great meeting of all religous influences, they decided to make a cannon of stories that would be the christian maifesto. So they got all the stories which were being read by christians at the time, and VOTED which ones they thought were important enough to be included, many of the stories were written decades, even centuries apart from one another. Tah dah, the bible was born

Heres some food for thought, did god created everything then he must of made the law of physics correct? And if he did make the law of physics why did he make so when we fall off a cliff we splat to the earth instead a simply floating down?

In the interests of full disclosure, I am a Catholic and have personal faith in the existence of God. That said....


Do you mean "scientifically proven"? What is your basis for this claim? When last I checked, the existence of God had been neither scientifically proven nor disproven.

I find it difficult to believe that the existence of God has been scientifically proven. "Thou shalt not put the Lord, thy God, to the test." Yet, testing things is the basis of all science.

Okay, I'm slow.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
Founder and Delegate of The Realm of Ambrosia

Through faith, all things that are invisible are made manifest.

He says that rights are natural, not God given, in most of those statements. It comes by logical deduction, that if we are created by God, that all things that are inherent would have been granted by God.


Problem is He also states that those "natural" endowments are part of the 'natural law' created by God. Not something self-existant, but rather created. That doesn't necessarilyt make Jefferson right, though I believe he is. Rather than twisting his words why don't you just disagree. Even Jefferson would defend that right on your behalf.

Prove it.

Jesus said, "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;" (John 14:16)

Who do you suppose that Comforter was?

He went on to say, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." (John 14:26)

Sounds like a new message a'comin'.

Can we say ... mmmmm ... Qur'an?
Mohammed was not the Holy Spirit. The HOly Spirit is part of the Godhead. Mohmammed was just a prophet. A false prophet, but just a prophet nonetheless.

." (John 14:26)

Sounds like a new message a'comin'.

Can we say ... mmmmm ... Qur'an?

Actually, sounds like a reminder of the message already given to me.

And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.
Luke12:10

And one of the company said unto him, Master, speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me.
14. And he said unto him, Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you?
15. And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.
Luke 12

Problem is He also states that those "natural" endowments are part of the 'natural law' created by God. Not something self-existant, but rather created. That doesn't necessarilyt make Jefferson right, though I believe he is. Rather than twisting his words why don't you just disagree. Even Jefferson would defend that right on your behalf.

Just itching for me to quit analyzing the statements and argue aren't you?

Man is by nature a rational being endowed with rights and an a basic sense of justice by nature. Jefferson in 1823

A free people claim their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrates or their neighbors. Jefferson
Rights of British America 1774

Nothing is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man. jefferson 1824

He states they are inherent, and thus are created by God. I would say that Jefferson was more sure of the fact that rights are natural and inherent than he was the nature of God.

But no matter whether rights are God given or natural, they are still inherent and their nature does not change.

Mohammed was not the Holy Spirit. The HOly Spirit is part of the Godhead. Mohmammed was just a prophet. A false prophet, but just a prophet nonetheless.

How do you know? I mean ... Mohammed performed miracles, received a message that no Christian scholar has been able to debunk and has remained unchanged for 1400 years (all the while, Biblical revisions have happened no less than 16 times), and brought together his people in a way Jesus was never able to do. Not 10 minutes after Jesus' death, there was already infighting and divisiveness among Christians ... something that didn't happen in Islam until the secularization of Turkey and abolishment of the Caliphate ... in the 1920s.

Shrug ... I dunno man ... I'm seeing you make statements, but offering no proof.

51. Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
52. For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
53. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
57. Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?
58. When thou goest with thine adversary to the magistrate, as thou art in the way, give diligence that thou mayest be delivered from him; lest he hale thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and the officer cast thee into prison.
59. I tell thee, thou shalt not depart thence, till thou hast paid the very last mite.
luke 12

Just itching for me to quit analyzing the statements and argue aren't you?

Man is by nature a rational being endowed with rights and an a basic sense of justice by nature. Jefferson in 1823

A free people claim their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrates or their neighbors. Jefferson
Rights of British America 1774

Nothing is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man. jefferson 1824

He states they are inherent, and thus are created by God. I would say that Jefferson was more sure of the fact that rights are natural and inherent than he was the nature of God.

But no matter whether rights are God given or natural, they are still inherent and their nature does not change.

You do realize that you two are saying the same thing?

How do you know? I mean ... Mohammed performed miracles, received a message that no Christian scholar has been able to debunk and has remained unchanged for 1400 years (all the while, Biblical revisions have happened no less than 16 times), and brought together his people in a way Jesus was never able to do. Not 10 minutes after Jesus' death, there was already infighting and divisiveness among Christians ... something that didn't happen in Islam until the secularization of Turkey and abolishment of the Caliphate ... in the 1920s.

Shrug ... I dunno man ... I'm seeing you make statements, but offering no proof.
Actually, Mohammed did no miracles. It is written that the world will unite against the followers of Christ. That's just what Islam is. the world against christ.

Just itching for me to quit analyzing the statements and argue aren't you?

But no matter whether rights are God given or natural, they are still inherent and their nature does not change.

Actually, I'd almost be disappointed if you gave up that easily. As for Jefferson's belief about where rights came from, it is pretty clear that he believed they were created by God as part of the 'laws of nature'. Continue to argue if you will, that is fine.

As for you last statement, I disagree, which I believe you already know. But in case not, my argument to that comes back to the issue of creation. If God created us and gave us rights then we have them. If God does not exist and we evolved, rights are little more than a figment of human imagination that we create and destroy on the basis of individual whim. If I believe it is my right to kill you then it is and if you believe it is your right to kill me too, then it is. Who has greater authority to argue with either of us?

Actually, Mohammed did no miracles. It is written that the world will unite against the followers of Christ. That's just what Islam is. the world against christ.
any quotes or proof of this claim?

Actually, Mohammed did no miracles. It is written that the world will unite against the followers of Christ. That's just what Islam is. the world against christ.

I'd say Qur'an itself is a pretty astounding miracle. Islam is not against Jesus or his followers. Islam recognizes that Jesus was sent by Allah and recognizes the divinity of Jesus' message.

It is also commanded in Qur'an that Muslims are to treat Jews and Christians with kindness and respect.

Islam is not "the world against Christ".

You do realize that you two are saying the same thing?

Actually, we are only close to saying the same thing. We have expressed actually differing opinions on Jefferson's original intent, which ultimately is irrelevent in terms of proving where rights actually come from. I think we would both agree to that part, but we have differing views on what Jefferson said and where rights actually come from.

I actaully believe very strongly that you are correct, that they are God given via creation and redemption, but proving that from scripture will not satisfy folks here as many of them deny the validity of scripture. The truth is, there is no way to "prove" anything to someone who refuses to relate to the "evidence" in a similar way. It is that problem of "seeking a sign", seeking proof, that will always be a bone of contention for some.

I hope that makes sense. Just don't let your zeal for the truth get in the way of your Christian love when arguing with them.

I'd say Qur'an itself is a pretty astounding miracle. Islam is not against Jesus or his followers. Islam recognizes that Jesus was sent by Allah and recognizes the divinity of Jesus' message.

It is also commanded in Qur'an that Muslims are to treat Jews and Christians with kindness and respect.

Islam is not "the world against Christ".
Islam is antichrist because it denies that Christ is God.

Islam is antichrist because it denies that Christ is God.

So does Judaism ... lemme guess ... Judaism is also "the world against Christ" ... never minding the fact that when Torah was written, there wouldn't be Christians yet for 2,000 years.

Pre-emptive strike?

Actually, I'd almost be disappointed if you gave up that easily. As for Jefferson's belief about where rights came from, it is pretty clear that he believed they were created by God as part of the 'laws of nature'. Continue to argue if you will, that is fine.

We are both saying the same thing, but I said it first. ;)

Where we disagree, is how Jefferson arrived at his belief. I say that he noted that we have inalienable rights, and that from that he concluded that they must have come from God.

As for you last statement, I disagree, which I believe you already know. But in case not, my argument to that comes back to the issue of creation. If God created us and gave us rights then we have them. If God does not exist and we evolved, rights are little more than a figment of human imagination that we create and destroy on the basis of individual whim. If I believe it is my right to kill you then it is and if you believe it is your right to kill me too, then it is. Who has greater authority to argue with either of us?

I think Jefferson would disagree with you. I think he recognized that our rights were inherent regardless of the origin of them. He recognized the ability of a person to live free of restraint when not hindered by a government. He logically assumed that this was a gift from God. However, I imagine that if he had been atheist, he would have assumed that those rights would still be natural to us.

It could never be your right to murder me, as that would take away my rights.

There does not need to be a higher authority for there to exist a system of laws and values for society to adhere to. It would follow to assume that any higher authority would be the product of such a system, instead of the creator.

Islam is antichrist because it denies that Christ is God.
Its called a different interpretation, everyone has one.
And wouldnt that make all non christians antichrist?

Its called a different interpretation, everyone has one.
And wouldnt that make all non christians antichrist?
yes it does. Have you not seen my qoute from yesterday where it stated that antichrist was anyone who denied the Godhoodness of Christ?

yes it does. Have you not seen my qoute from yesterday where it stated that antichrist was anyone who denied the Godhoodness of Christ?


mmmm.

Screw god, and let jesus christ go to hell!

WOHOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Now i can tell everyone i am the antichist :D

"dances"

yes it does. Have you not seen my qoute from yesterday where it stated that antichrist was anyone who denied the Godhoodness of Christ?

In short ... *all* of the Prophets ... Moses, Isaiah, Elijah, Malachi, etc ... all of them antichrist.

Strange little belief system you have there. The Bible states that to deny a single prophet is to deny God. Guess you're antichrist, too.

In short ... *all* of the Prophets ... Moses, Isaiah, Elijah, Malachi, etc ... all of them antichrist.

Strange little belief system you have there. The Bible states that to deny a single prophet is to deny God. Guess you're antichrist, too.
Those prophets accepted Christ as God's son.

I believe in people.
We dont need a god (lets say if there is one) People have done just fine by themselves wouldnt you say?

In short ... *all* of the Prophets ... Moses, Isaiah, Elijah, Malachi, etc ... all of them antichrist.

Strange little belief system you have there. The Bible states that to deny a single prophet is to deny God. Guess you're antichrist, too.


If i curse the muslim god, will i go to hell too?

Good thing there is a lot of intellectual conversation in this thread, because all of that Christians are right/wrong stuff in the other threads just got on my nerves. :rolleyes:

Heh, its funny because my real name is Malachi =)

Those prophets accepted Christ as God's son.

Don't be daft. Moses died 2000 years before Jesus was born.

As a matter of fact, Moses HIMSELF wrote:

"Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth: And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven." (Deut. 4:15-19)

God doesn't show up in the form of a human. Never has, never will. Moses knew that, so should you.

If i curse the muslim god, will i go to hell too?

Dunno ... you'd have to ask Allah yourself.

Heh, its funny because my real name is Malachi =)

My son's Hebrew name is Malachi. :)

I think Jefferson would disagree with you. I think he recognized that our rights were inherent regardless of the origin of them. He recognized the ability of a person to live free of restraint when not hindered by a government. He logically assumed that this was a gift from God. However, I imagine that if he had been atheist, he would have assumed that those rights would still be natural to us.

It could never be your right to murder me, as that would take away my rights.

There does not need to be a higher authority for there to exist a system of laws and values for society to adhere to. It would follow to assume that any higher authority would be the product of such a system, instead of the creator.

Jefferson might well disagree with me on the latter point, though I doubt it.

As for taking away your rights, if I and or those with sufficient power to act don't believe you have any and there is no higher authority than human opinion why should I/they care what you think? Their opinion is just as valid as yours.

Dunno ... you'd have to ask Allah yourself.

You know, if i wasnt so damn heretic, i'd turn to islam.

(No, don't try to convert me)

Pre-emptive strike?

lol

thats funny

You know, if i wasnt so damn heretic, i'd turn to islam.

(No, don't try to convert me)

im with you

if i ever need spiritual guidence in that way

im going islam, screw christianity...

*ding: 1000*

You know, if i wasnt so damn heretic, i'd turn to islam.

You have every right to be a heretic. Your relationship with Allah is your own and nobody but you can change it.

(No, don't try to convert me)

lol! Don't worry ... we don't do that.

Jefferson might well disagree with me on the latter point, though I doubt it.

As for taking away your rights, if I and or those with sufficient power to act don't believe you have any and there is no higher authority than human opinion why should I/they care what you think? Their opinion is just as valid as yours.

There is a need for a authority in guaranteeing rights, it is called society. It is a flat authority, however. With authority stemming from the system, not the creator.

I repeat:

There does not need to be a higher authority for there to exist a system of laws and values for society to adhere to. It would follow to assume that any higher authority would be the product of such a system, instead of the creator.

Don't be daft. Moses died 2000 years before Jesus was born.

As a matter of fact, Moses HIMSELF wrote:

"Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth: And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven." (Deut. 4:15-19)

God doesn't show up in the form of a human. Never has, never will. Moses knew that, so should you.

Isaiah 59:20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord.

Isaiah 53:2-11" 2. For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.
3. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
6. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
7. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
8. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
9. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
11. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities."

Isaiah 42 "1. Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
2. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.
3. A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth.
4. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.
5. Thus saith God the Lord, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:
6. I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;
7. To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house."

Isaiah 49: 6. And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.
7. Thus saith the Lord, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth, to a servant of rulers, Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship, because of the Lord that is faithful, and the Holy One of Israel, and he shall choose thee.
8. Thus saith the Lord, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;
9. That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, shew yourselves. They shall feed in the ways, and their pastures shall be in all high places.
10. They shall not hunger nor thirst; neither shall the heat nor sun smite them: for he that hath mercy on them shall lead them, even by the springs of water shall he guide them.

Isaiah 9: 6. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, the everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
7. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

Daniel 9: 25. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Isaiah 19:20. And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto the Lord of hosts in the land of Egypt: for they shall cry unto the Lord because of the oppressors, and he shall send them a saviour, and a great one, and he shall deliver them.

Isaiah 43: 11. I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour.

Hosea13: 4. Yet I am the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me.



Luke 2: 0. And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
11. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
12. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
13. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
14. Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

John 4 42. And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.

Acts 5: 29. Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
30. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
31. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
32. And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

Acts 13: 22. And when he had removed him, he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will.
23. Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus:

Philippians 3: 20. For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:
21. Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.
(If Jesus was just a man, he would not be able to do this.)

Titus:1: 4. To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

Titus 2: 13. Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14. Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

2 Peter 1: 1. For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

2 Peter 2:20. For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.

1 John 4: 14. And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
15. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

Sorry Whitt but have you ever heard of John Leland?


"Never promote men who seek after a state-established religion; it is spiritual tyranny--the worst of despotism. It is turnpiking the way to heaven by human law, in order to establish ministerial gates to collect toll. It converts religion into a principle of state policy, and the gospel into merchandise. Heaven forbids the bans of marriage between church and state; their embraces therefore, must be unlawful. Guard against those men who make a great noise about religion, in choosing representatives. It is electioneering. If they knew the nature and worth of religion, they would not debauch it to such shameful purposes. If pure religion is the criterion to denominate candidates, those who make a noise about it must be rejected; for their wrangle about it, proves that they are void of it. Let honesty, talents and quick despatch, characterise the men of your choice. Such men will have a sympathy with their constituents, and will be willing to come to the light, that their deeds may be examined. . . ."

Sorry Whitt but have you ever heard of John Leland?


"Never promote men who seek after a state-established religion; it is spiritual tyranny--the worst of despotism. It is turnpiking the way to heaven by human law, in order to establish ministerial gates to collect toll. It converts religion into a principle of state policy, and the gospel into merchandise. Heaven forbids the bans of marriage between church and state; their embraces therefore, must be unlawful. Guard against those men who make a great noise about religion, in choosing representatives. It is electioneering. If they knew the nature and worth of religion, they would not debauch it to such shameful purposes. If pure religion is the criterion to denominate candidates, those who make a noise about it must be rejected; for their wrangle about it, proves that they are void of it. Let honesty, talents and quick despatch, characterise the men of your choice. Such men will have a sympathy with their constituents, and will be willing to come to the light, that their deeds may be examined. . . ."


I've heard of John Cleland. But I don't think he would have said that.

I've heard of John Cleland. But I don't think he would have said that.

As in Fanny Hill?

Nope different guys. Leland was a Baptist Minister and a firm beliver that goverment and religion should be two seperate entites.

As if you couldn't have guessed that! ;)

As in Fanny Hill?

Nope different guys. Leland was a Baptist Minister and a firm beliver that goverment and religion should be two seperate entites.

As if you couldn't have guessed that! ;)

Damn you for knowing that. I was about to sing his praises as a great philosopher.

As in Fanny Hill?

Nope different guys. Leland was a Baptist Minister and a firm beliver that goverment and religion should be two seperate entites.

As if you couldn't have guessed that! ;)
Some European guy probably.

Works for me. Okay, you can add political rights to that, though I don't know that Jefferson would argue that political rights are derived from God in quite the same way as civil ones are.

Political rights are only valuable in so far as they protect civil rights.

Political rights are an oxy-moron if you understand and accept civil rights. With absolute understanding of human rights there is no need for another person to limit you. When you throw politics into any mix, it restricts a civil right in some way. We all have a right to protect ourselves and any other from useless violence. Some justified force has been proven to bring peace and if you have spoke with God then you will know what I am talking about. God can explode your heart at anytime so don't ever lose the love you can emit with it. And yes you must love through force to those that do not hear (understand) by other means to get the point accross.

Sorry Whitt but have you ever heard of John Leland?


"Never promote men who seek after a state-established religion; it is spiritual tyranny--the worst of despotism. It is turnpiking the way to heaven by human law, in order to establish ministerial gates to collect toll. It converts religion into a principle of state policy, and the gospel into merchandise. Heaven forbids the bans of marriage between church and state; their embraces therefore, must be unlawful. Guard against those men who make a great noise about religion, in choosing representatives. It is electioneering. If they knew the nature and worth of religion, they would not debauch it to such shameful purposes. If pure religion is the criterion to denominate candidates, those who make a noise about it must be rejected; for their wrangle about it, proves that they are void of it. Let honesty, talents and quick despatch, characterise the men of your choice. Such men will have a sympathy with their constituents, and will be willing to come to the light, that their deeds may be examined. . . ."

I don't think he is saying you should vote against people just for being openly religious. He is saying if they want to base laws off the Bible or some such, then you shouldn't vote for them. None of Bush's laws are based off the Bible. But off sound principles shared by everyone regardless of religion, with the exception of the commies who continue to hate him.

There is a need for a authority in guaranteeing rights, it is called society. It is a flat authority, however. With authority stemming from the system, not the creator.

I repeat:

There does not need to be a higher authority for there to exist a system of laws and values for society to adhere to. It would follow to assume that any higher authority would be the product of such a system, instead of the creator.


The problem with this is that it becomes strictly majority rule. If society believes killing specific groups of people is acceptable and that they have no rights, like oh say Nazi Germany, then it is so. Sorry, but I just can't buy that as sufficient authority. It essentially creates a situation where nothing is right or wrong, it is just whatever the majority believe or want.

The system does not create authority. The individuals that lend their power and will to the system give it its authority and the collective power may be greater than an individuals power, but it does not create moral or inherent rights.

Sorry Whitt but have you ever heard of John Leland?


"Never promote men who seek after a state-established religion; it is spiritual tyranny--the worst of despotism. It is turnpiking the way to heaven by human law, in order to establish ministerial gates to collect toll. It converts religion into a principle of state policy, and the gospel into merchandise. Heaven forbids the bans of marriage between church and state; their embraces therefore, must be unlawful. Guard against those men who make a great noise about religion, in choosing representatives. It is electioneering. If they knew the nature and worth of religion, they would not debauch it to such shameful purposes. If pure religion is the criterion to denominate candidates, those who make a noise about it must be rejected; for their wrangle about it, proves that they are void of it. Let honesty, talents and quick despatch, characterise the men of your choice. Such men will have a sympathy with their constituents, and will be willing to come to the light, that their deeds may be examined. . . ."

Let all God's people say Amen! Well quoted.

Reading those quotes, it sounds like Jefferson was a humanist.

Political rights are an oxy-moron if you understand and accept civil rights. With absolute understanding of human rights there is no need for another person to limit you. When you throw politics into any mix, it restricts a civil right in some way. We all have a right to protect ourselves and any other from useless violence. Some justified force has been proven to bring peace and if you have spoke with God then you will know what I am talking about. God can explode your heart at anytime so don't ever lose the love you can emit with it. And yes you must love through force to those that do not hear (understand) by other means to get the point accross.
Political rights trump civil rights which are but an invention of the commies. Have read the ruling on Brown versus Board of Education? The whole thing was based only on the premise that the original Cheif Justice was sitting on the case had died just a couple of months prior. Before that, the court was going to rule against Brown. The only thing that made it go the other way was that the liberal activist governor of California got elected and electioneered his views on the rest of the court which was still upset about the loss of the previous cheif justice. He was feeling extreme remorse cause some of his laws he passed as governor resulted in extreme inhumane treatment of blacks in Cali. Hence the Supreme Court was not in the right frame of mind when they made their Brown ruling. So for that you have to look at the original intention of the author's of the 14th amendment. Nowhere, for example does it say the seperate cannever be equal. That was a claim by a former Cali gov. that was based on nothing more than pure emotion and regret but not on fact. What made the school system unequal back then, was the fact that the state did not provide equal funding. So what happened is, we went and glossed it over by saying outside appearances count more than what is happening inside. The court essentially said "Equal funding and whether a kids get a good quality education does not matter as long as we do all it takes to make sure there ethnic qoutas in all the schools." And since then the children of all races have been suffering. Why do blacks have the highest drop out rates today? Brown v Board of Education which pretty much screwed them over.
The point I am making is that you ought to beware of unscrupulous persons who make erroneous claims and then tell people that such claims are true when the facts state otherwise.

I don't think he is saying you should vote against people just for being openly religious. He is saying if they want to base laws off the Bible or some such, then you shouldn't vote for them. None of Bush's laws are based off the Bible. But off sound principles shared by everyone regardless of religion, with the exception of the commies who continue to hate him.


Commies? Oh, so I'm a commie now? You've mastered the art of being a Troll. Congratulations!!

Reading those quotes, it sounds like Jefferson was a humanist.


Well, a Deist, more specifically. Although, Deism was pretty much synonymous with today's humanism.

The problem with this is that it becomes strictly majority rule. If society believes killing specific groups of people is acceptable and that they have no rights, like oh say Nazi Germany, then it is so. Sorry, but I just can't buy that as sufficient authority. It essentially creates a situation where nothing is right or wrong, it is just whatever the majority believe or want.

The system does not create authority. The individuals that lend their power and will to the system give it its authority and the collective power may be greater than an individuals power, but it does not create moral or inherent rights.
Groups don't have rights, only individuals have rights.

This is why we have constitutional republic and not a democracy as most people erroneously believe. In democracies, the majority is always right even if it means persecution of minority groups.

Political rights trump civil rights which are but an invention of the commies. Have read the ruling on Brown versus Board of Education? The whole thing was based only on the premise that the original Cheif Justice was sitting on the case had died just a couple of months prior. Before that, the court was going to rule against Brown. The only thing that made it go the other way was that the liberal activist governor of California got elected and electioneered his views on the rest of the court which was still upset about the loss of the previous cheif justice. He was feeling extreme remorse cause some of his laws he passed as governor resulted in extreme inhumane treatment of blacks in Cali. Hence the Supreme Court was not in the right frame of mind when they made their Brown ruling. So for that you have to look at the original intention of the author's of the 14th amendment. Nowhere, for example does it say the seperate cannever be equal. That was a claim by a former Cali gov. that was based on nothing more than pure emotion and regret but not on fact. What made the school system unequal back then, was the fact that the state did not provide equal funding. So what happened is, we went and glossed it over by saying outside appearances count more than what is happening inside. The court essentially said "Equal funding and whether a kids get a good quality education does not matter as long as we do all it takes to make sure there ethnic qoutas in all the schools." And since then the children of all races have been suffering. Why do blacks have the highest drop out rates today? Brown v Board of Education which pretty much screwed them over.
The point I am making is that you ought to beware of unscrupulous persons who make erroneous claims and then tell people that such claims are true when the facts state otherwise

There is no such thing as politcal rights in a real context that matters at all. Only those that want to listen to that bullshit will abide by it. Civil rights stem from every individual that uses their God given rights to live their life, political rights has no bearing of meaning whatsoever in my life and I hope yours as well. If you are calling God unscrupulous for stating "stay away from politics", for some reason I feel one has a bit more righteousness in their words than the other. The righteous one(s) do not tout for (fake, does nothing) political freedom over God given freedom to choose wisely in our decisions in life.

Ummm, I've read the thread, and am I right in assuming that Whittier is trying to use Jefferson quotes to support a theocracy in America?

:rolleyes:

Ummm, I've read the thread, and am I right in assuming that Whittier is trying to use Jefferson quotes to support a theocracy in America?

:rolleyes:


Yeah. Wtf moment, or what?

The problem with this is that it becomes strictly majority rule. If society believes killing specific groups of people is acceptable and that they have no rights, like oh say Nazi Germany, then it is so. Sorry, but I just can't buy that as sufficient authority. It essentially creates a situation where nothing is right or wrong, it is just whatever the majority believe or want.

The system does not create authority. The individuals that lend their power and will to the system give it its authority and the collective power may be greater than an individuals power, but it does not create moral or inherent rights.

You are exactly right on every one of those statements.

I never said those authoritative systems create morals or rights. Like Jefferson, I believe that rights are inherent in people, and the only authority that a government should have is how to protect those inherent rights.

When I talked about a flat-authority system (society), I meant a system in which people who already have rights, bind together to protect said rights.

Our fundamental disagreement is a huge one. Whereas, I believe people have rights and build up to protect those rights, you say God has filtered the rights down to us.

Also, the argument that human societies are faulty and can lead to the powerful enforcing their will on the weak will not support your argument for God granted rights and authority. Even if you are correct about God having authority and granting us rights, those injustices happened on his watch, too.

So, that argument would only help my argument, as human systems of authority would be fallible, while a God given authority would not be.

Groups don't have rights, only individuals have rights.

This is why we have constitutional republic and not a democracy as most people erroneously believe. In democracies, the majority is always right even if it means persecution of minority groups.

You are wrong and right. Majority rule does exist in government, however, this particular government was designed so that even the smallest majority cannot have their rights taken from them.

There is no such thing as politcal rights in a real context that matters at all. Only those that want to listen to that bullshit will abide by it. Civil rights stem from every individual that uses their God given rights to live their life, political rights has no bearing of meaning whatsoever in my life and I hope yours as well. If you are calling God unscrupulous for stating "stay away from politics", for some reason I feel one has a bit more righteousness in their words than the other. The righteous one(s) do not tout for (fake, does nothing) political freedom over God given freedom to choose wisely in our decisions in life.
Civil rights as you call them, or group rights which is what civil rights really are, don't exist. Only political rights. God has no where said that people should stay away from politics. Political freedom is what we get from God. Hence, political freedoms trump all group rights including civil rights. Indeed the only rights that count are the rights of the individual.

Civil rights as you call them, or group rights which is what civil rights really are, don't exist. Only political rights. God has no where said that people should stay away from politics. Political freedom is what we get from God. Hence, political freedoms trump all group rights including civil rights. Indeed the only rights that count are the rights of the individual.

Political rights are fake and non existant. Name one political right that limits or actually tells me how to live my life or another and makes them do it through force of politics. Individual rights is what I am talking about from not a collective (same) sense but in a indifferent sense. God has spoken "stay away from politics". I would not believe something I heard from another except God or someone that your senses show to be aware of the situation. No book and no other item out there is a trust worthy source. Straight from the horses mouth is the only way an intelligent person will seek an absolute truth (avoids assumption). Use your instincts and you will find that the world around you today is not quite what it seems. If you are a faithfull person then you know what I am speaking of. Political freedom and rights are a oxymoron because they are intended on creating a unfaithfull society by means of judgement from one self righteous person to another. When you find God then you find the rules around you that you thought were present are not actually there for you, they are there for people that need them.

True believers (doesnt have to involve any religion or religious book created my a man) see the things that happen to joan of arcadia (tv show) as a daily occurence in one way or another. Awareness through your newfound sense is the only way to aquire and attempt at understanding just how powerful God is. The deal is: God can stop time (or do something where maybe man can not fully understand) to where another is not even aware of what someone else already is well aware of at any point in time. You either have it or you don't and anyone from any religion or not that has a true belief in God knows what I am speaking of.

Our senses (feelings included) are similiar to the way a bugs anttenna's or feelers such as those on cats when they are in truly dark enclosed area's act. Our senses and feelings are senses to what is surrounding us upon that very moment (instincts). I can not explain my relationship with someone I wish all of you would give a chance without judging. God is the true definition of freedom.

Through an understanding of "No formalities" "No labels" "Seek Peace" "stay away from politics" "Use your instincts" "we are twins". I know that when I poured my heart out and verified after verified that vidictiveness begets more vidictiveness I had a experience that is undescribable it made an infinite amount of orgasms seem so damn wimpy compared to the feeling of love God has with you. All I can say is that I did not have that much to show the greatest being of all when my life flashed before God. I still don't know if thats a good or a bad thing? Im hoping a very good thing. But one thing I do know, is that God knows what is in your heart and its intent. God is understnading to when it is true with good intentions. Be truthfull. Truth does matter because I experienced a bit of a wrath for a lie I made before meeting. My Lies to anyone have stopped since that very day. I don't mind telling anything to anyone that is interested in a full true faithfull word. Especially things that were embarrasing before so. He frees you from the feeling of oppression that you may get through man made sources. You can do something about changing the world, everyone of us can. Give Thanks to God.

Nay. That would be the government claiming to be God. Which would make it antichrist.

I agree that when you have a self righteous one speaking for control over another it becomes useless in the end. Oppression (pressure) of any kind releases steam sooner or later in one form or another.

And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.
Luke12:10

Yes I agree with this because man is in an imperfect state of being (at sometimes in life if not most) while the holy ghost appears to be the purest form or of a definite higher point in being. In reality I would think you could say God not only is the trinity but is one in the holy ghost emerging from a ultimate twin between spirit and man.

In short ... *all* of the Prophets ... Moses, Isaiah, Elijah, Malachi, etc ... all of them antichrist.

Strange little belief system you have there. The Bible states that to deny a single prophet is to deny God. Guess you're antichrist, too.
Nay, what the Bible does say is that if you deny Jesus, you are guilty of denying God.

The problem with this is that it becomes strictly majority rule. If society believes killing specific groups of people is acceptable and that they have no rights, like oh say Nazi Germany, then it is so. Sorry, but I just can't buy that as sufficient authority. It essentially creates a situation where nothing is right or wrong, it is just whatever the majority believe or want.

The system does not create authority. The individuals that lend their power and will to the system give it its authority and the collective power may be greater than an individuals power, but it does not create moral or inherent rights.
That is why we have a constitutional republic and not a democracy.

Political rights are fake and non existant. Name one political right that limits or actually tells me how to live my life or another and makes them do it through force of politics. Individual rights is what I am talking about from not a collective (same) sense but in a indifferent sense. God has spoken "stay away from politics". I would not believe something I heard from another except God or someone that your senses show to be aware of the situation. No book and no other item out there is a trust worthy source. Straight from the horses mouth is the only way an intelligent person will seek an absolute truth (avoids assumption). Use your instincts and you will find that the world around you today is not quite what it seems. If you are a faithfull person then you know what I am speaking of. Political freedom and rights are a oxymoron because they are intended on creating a unfaithfull society by means of judgement from one self righteous person to another. When you find God then you find the rules around you that you thought were present are not actually there for you, they are there for people that need them.

True believers (doesnt have to involve any religion or religious book created my a man) see the things that happen to joan of arcadia (tv show) as a daily occurence in one way or another. Awareness through your newfound sense is the only way to aquire and attempt at understanding just how powerful God is. The deal is: God can stop time (or do something where maybe man can not fully understand) to where another is not even aware of what someone else already is well aware of at any point in time. You either have it or you don't and anyone from any religion or not that has a true belief in God knows what I am speaking of.

Our senses (feelings included) are similiar to the way a bugs anttenna's or feelers such as those on cats when they are in truly dark enclosed area's act. Our senses and feelings are senses to what is surrounding us upon that very moment (instincts). I can not explain my relationship with someone I wish all of you would give a chance without judging. God is the true definition of freedom.

Through an understanding of "No formalities" "No labels" "Seek Peace" "stay away from politics" "Use your instincts" "we are twins". I know that when I poured my heart out and verified after verified that vidictiveness begets more vidictiveness I had a experience that is undescribable it made an infinite amount of orgasms seem so damn wimpy compared to the feeling of love God has with you. All I can say is that I did not have that much to show the greatest being of all when my life flashed before God. I still don't know if thats a good or a bad thing? Im hoping a very good thing. But one thing I do know, is that God knows what is in your heart and its intent. God is understnading to when it is true with good intentions. Be truthfull. Truth does matter because I experienced a bit of a wrath for a lie I made before meeting. My Lies to anyone have stopped since that very day. I don't mind telling anything to anyone that is interested in a full true faithfull word. Especially things that were embarrasing before so. He frees you from the feeling of oppression that you may get through man made sources. You can do something about changing the world, everyone of us can. Give Thanks to God.

Nowhere did God say that we are to stay away from politics. He only said we were to keep politics and religion seperate.

Joan of Arcadia is not a valid guide to religion or faith as it is created by greedy hollywood producers to promote the political goals of extremist left wing liberals who hate America. My God is not a God of hate. Hence, I don't accept anything that is put out by a tv program made by liberals who have never stepped foot in a church except to mock christianity with their false pieties and attacks on Christian doctrine.

There are certain political rights that we do indeed derive from God.

Nowhere did God say that we are to stay away from politics. He only said we were to keep politics and religion seperate.

Joan of Arcadia is not a valid guide to religion or faith as it is created by greedy hollywood producers to promote the political goals of extremist left wing liberals who hate America. My God is not a God of hate. Hence, I don't accept anything that is put out by a tv program made by liberals who have never stepped foot in a church except to mock christianity with their false pieties and attacks on Christian doctrine.

There are certain political rights that we do indeed derive from God

The whole deal with me mentioning that tv show is only about the basis or daily occurence that people will experience when they are aware of God in their life. Or at least this is how cool I have noticed God to be. God stated to me those things that I quoted and after the transformation or however you would describe the immediate change in my life that I have now become aware of. That I also thought every person that believes in God has and will go through? God is not a God of hate, God is a love and understanding, life and acceptance and deliverance of righteousness (truth). There is no such thing as a political right for a self righteous person, this creates an absolute oxymoron of judgement by the self-righteous.