The Declaration of Independence

[sear]

"Wow...everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." FA #119

Virtually yes.
Rare exceptions include residents on death row. That's not the State usurping their right to live. It's the resident having forfeited it.

"and those rights came from my mother and father." FA

Not according to Jefferson.
There's little dispute that your LIFE comes from parents.
They may even have some influence over your pursuit of happiness (an 18th century reference to prosperity).

But I don't recall the words "mother", "father", or "parents" appearing in TJ/DOI in that context. Jefferson said "Creator".

 

[domer76]

Thus the name. I've never heard anyone call it The Law of Independence.

- piffle -
It may not be enforceable law.
That doesn't mean it's not a right. And Jefferson was explicitly clear about that. Such rights don't come from government. Such rights come from our Creator (please note the cap). And that government's role is merely to secure these rights.

Plenty of people quote the Declaration as if it were law. I've corrected the misinformed numerous times on the forum. Always one of the RWers.

"Enforceable law"? Tell me, what is an "unenforceable law"?

Despite my inquiries, I haven't been able to find anyone who can identify any rights except those which are codified. And you'll never be able to argue a single right in a court of law that hasn't been codified. "Natural or Universal Rights" are often cited, but nobody can define exactly what those are. When you find a universal one, let me know.

Re: rights coming from a Creator - bunk on stilts.

 

[domer76]

Yes, "are" and still that clearly does not suggest that all then enjoyed equality in the eyes of the law.

This is pointless. You don't have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge the obvious intent of the words and you dishonestly suggest that they meant something that other statements within the document clearly make impossible. Your reading of it is ignorant and petulant nonsense.

See bolded. Glad you finally agree with what I've been saying.

It is pointless when you are clearly making the inferences, but think I am the one doing so. I can't cure your lack of self-awareness.

You haven't identified a single "other statement within the document" that admits not all are free or even equal, nor that they are goals or aspirations.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Virtually yes.
Rare exceptions include residents on death row. That's not the State usurping their right to live. It's the resident having forfeited it.

Not according to Jefferson.
There's little dispute that your LIFE comes from parents.
They may even have some influence over your pursuit of happiness (an 18th century reference to prosperity).

But I don't recall the words "mother", "father", or "parents" appearing in TJ/DOI in that context. Jefferson said "Creator".

In my case, they are the only creators for me that I know of.

I understand that some people, perhaps Thomas Jefferson was one, who blindly guess that there was a creator deserving of the capital "C."

I do not make that blind guess.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Plenty of people quote the Declaration as if it were law. I've corrected the misinformed numerous times on the forum. Always one of the RWers.

"Enforceable law"? Tell me, what is an "unenforceable law"?

Despite my inquiries, I haven't been able to find anyone who can identify any rights except those which are codified. And you'll never be able to argue a single right in a court of law that hasn't been codified. "Natural or Universal Rights" are often cited, but nobody can define exactly what those are. When you find a universal one, let me know.

Re: rights coming from a Creator - bunk on stilts.

There are NO natural or universal rights...except, if you want to stretch the definition of "rights" for the "right" to die.

There are NO unalienable rights.

And any rights any of us have...were won for us by blood, sweat, and tears during battles and wars.

The paragraph in question is a beautiful one...but that's all it is.

 

[Timshel]

See bolded. Glad you finally agree with what I've been saying.

It is pointless when you are clearly making the inferences, but think I am the one doing so. I can't cure your lack of self-awareness.

You haven't identified a single "other statement within the document" that admits not all are free or even equal, nor that they are goals or aspirations.

I have not agreed with you. You claimed that was their meaning, reading something into the words that was not there and said it was a lie when written. But that was not their meaning and, so, was never a lie.

The list of grievances both in the first draft and the final, makes clear that all were not then free or equal.

Your argument is absurd and nonsensical.

 

[domer76]

I have not agreed with you. You claimed that was their meaning, reading something into the words that was not there and said it was a lie when written. But that was not their meaning and, so, was never a lie.

The list of grievances both in the first draft and the final, makes clear that all were not then free or equal.

Your argument is absurd and nonsensical.

lol

One again, Timshel, YOU are reading words that are not there. Not a single word about aspirations. Find one for me, will ya'?

The list of grievances were nothing more than examples of the transgressions of George in order to justify revolt.

 

[Bigdog]

I don't have a definition. But the definition is an economic system in which the means of production and distribution are owned by the government, unlike, for example, the economic system in the U.S. supported by Republicans and Democrats alike.

Then North Korea is the most socialist country on the planet. And guess what, ... it looks just like a monarchy, ... dynastic rule and all.

 

[sear]

"Plenty of people quote the Declaration as if it were law. I've corrected the misinformed numerous times on the forum. Always one of the RWers." D7 #122

"The fact that somebody over-sells an idea doesn't make it a bad idea. It makes them a bad salesman." Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA ret)

Their misinformation does not negate the information.

""Enforceable law"? Tell me, what is an "unenforceable law"?" D7 #122

Drug War is a pretty good example.
How is the government supposed to know that a tax paying voter isn't growing mushrooms in their basement?
And the government threat is:

a) You better not !!

b) BUT IF YOU DO !! We'll pay your room, board, clothing, utilities, food bill, medical bills, dental bills, and education to punish you!

"Despite my inquiries, I haven't been able to find anyone who can identify any rights except those which are codified. And you'll never be able to argue a single right in a court of law that hasn't been codified. "Natural or Universal Rights" are often cited, but nobody can define exactly what those are. When you find a universal one, let me know." D7

"Codify" in your usage means put into words.

Let you know? OK. Consider yourself notified. We have a universal right to breath. If anyone marches up to you and obstructs your airway, that's a form of murder called "strangulation".
I don't know of any culture that doesn't frown on that. And I don't know of any ostensibly civilized culture with a CJ system that doesn't punish "murder by strangulation" about as severely as any other form of murder.

"let me know." D7

Consider yourself let.

"Re: rights coming from a Creator - bunk on stilts."

OBVIOUSLY !!!

BUT !!!!

It's not my assertion. Thus it's not my assertion to defend. It was U.S. Founder and Declaration of Independence author Thomas Jefferson that asserted it.
If you wish to exhume his corpse and rebuke him with repeated prodding with a sharp stick, I cannot prevent it.

"In my case, they are the only creators for me that I know of."

Again, way too obvious to bother stating.

But you're attempting to refute religious mumbo jumbo with logic. In that Venn diagram sir or m'am, there is no intersection.

"I understand that some people, perhaps Thomas Jefferson was one, who blindly guess that there was a creator deserving of the capital "C."
I do not make that blind guess." FA #124

Merciful Heavens !!!
Why don't you just render your "I'm an ignorant noranus" T-shirt a standard part of your daily uniform from now on?

It is a titanic blunder to misinterpret TJ's position as a religious devotee.
In the Founder's day, as in our own, religious zealots could not be swayed by logic or reason.

BUT !!

Don't take my word for it. Take TJ's own:
"In the fevered state of our country, no good can ever result from any attempt to set one of these fiery zealots to rights, either in fact or principle. They are determined as to the facts they will believe, and the opinions on which they will act. Get by them, therefore, as you would by an angry bull; it is not for a man of sense to dispute the road with such an animal."
Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), U.S. president. Letter, 24 Nov. 1808, to his grandson, Thomas Jefferson Randolph

 

[Ross Dolan]

Again, way too obvious to bother stating.

C'mon, Sear. YOU are stating many things that are obvious. We all are. We do so because we realize that some people do not want to acknowledge the obvious.

But you're attempting to refute religious mumbo jumbo with logic. In that Venn diagram sir or m'am, there is no intersection.

It has been done since the introduction of philosophy. If you do not like that I do it...don't read what I write.

Merciful Heavens !!!
Why don't you just render your "I'm an ignorant noranus" T-shirt a standard part of your daily uniform from now on?

Get the fuck off your high horse, before you fall and break your neck.

I do not make the blind guess that there is a "creator"...and I do not make the blind guess that there is none. What problem do you have with that...except that pomposity of yours on this issue?

It is a titanic blunder to misinterpret TJ's position as a religious devotee.

Then don't do it.

I certainly didn't in the qualified comment that you quoted of mine.

In the Founder's day, as in our own, religious zealots could not be swayed by logic or reason.

So?

We discuss the issues anyway.

What is your point?

If you do not want to discuss things because they do not "sway" some people...don't. I do not adhere to that kind of capitulation.

BUT !!

Don't take my word for it. Take TJ's own:
"In the fevered state of our country, no good can ever result from any attempt to set one of these fiery zealots to rights, either in fact or principle. They are determined as to the facts they will believe, and the opinions on which they will act. Get by them, therefore, as you would by an angry bull; it is not for a man of sense to dispute the road with such an animal."
Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), U.S. president. Letter, 24 Nov. 1808, to his grandson, Thomas Jefferson Randolph

If you are going to compare yourself to Thomas Jefferson, no matter how obliquely, I would respectfully suggest you get over yourself.