Where do your rights come from?

a reply to: TheRedneck

If I may, allow me to present a hypothetical situation to you: You are walking down a city street. The weather is clear; the temperature is moderate. You see an individual walking toward you on the sidewalk. He is a white man, 6'-0" tall, dressed casually if a bit sloppy. He has a full beard and sunglasses on, and his hands are in his pockets. There are not many people around. What are your thoughts?

I think, "There's a man walking on a public sidewalk, to be expected. He's walking toward me, so I better pay attention not to bump into him or do that awkward 'trying to get out of the way' dance with each other."

I'm not afraid of strangers doing predictable things. When strangers do weird or unpredictable things, I try to get stealthily leave the vicinity, or just not to make eye contact or be in anyway confrontational or combative.

I don't believe in an orthodox "god", but I do believe in a higher purpose in life than mere "dog eat dog" survival. I live my life as given to me, do my thing within the constraints of my existence. That's the challenge. And, my constraints are much more of my own making than something imposed by the government.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

lol

you probably the type to cross the street and walk the otherside walk to avoid minorities.

Say you dont, hahaha.

We both know you do.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

No its no hypotheticals, and I'll explain why.

In my experiance no one is completely happy with their societie's/governments current ballance between collectivism and strong individualism which for lack of a better term I will call anarchy.

That is because you are either a collectivist arguing for collectivism or you are a anarchist arguing for anarchism.

Politics is basically the negotiation between these two counterparties and society is the ballance struck.

Most of us know that either extreme realized equals a dead or doomed society, yet no matter what the balance is currently or how you see your views fitting within the scales of that ballance we all negotiate towards our preference for more collectivism or more anarchy.

The terms like liberal libertarian conservative socialist and the like as well as trying to figure out which best matches your beliefs or your current society/governments make up is confusing and counter productive at best because you are only communicating what you feel is an agreeable ballance between two counter parties.

This is why I only use your current form of government as the basis for comparison and ask whether you want it to have more authority over your daily activities or less.

Asking if you are for or against xyor z policy or whether x political idiology policy goes too far In either direction and which.

I hope this helps you understand how and why I have defined left and right politically the way I have and how I determine it.

I know this is not the typical highly contentious and hotly debated left right political idiology definition most people are used to using, but I have found it the most eficient at generating actionable data vs symantical arguments and hyperbolic relative suppositions.

I fully respect if you are uncomfortable sharing your political views in public which is why I also gave people the option to simply answer yes your hypothesis fits me or not it doesn't.

I guess I should have made it more apparent that since my hypothesis is limited on variables by design, once I have one half of your data set it cant be completed without revealing your political leanings, and whether you see your rights as coming from your god/creator, or society/government.

I wont blame anyone for being hesitant to share their religious/spiritual and political views on their current form of society/government publicly online with strangers.

But I will beg for a full data set if I feel one is within my reach and manoman we are close with yours.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

That is actually not the response I was expecting.

Ah, well, there goes another hypothesis down the drain. Thanks for answering.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Stevenmonet

You have a PM.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Stevenmonet

In my experiance no one is completely happy with their societie's/governments current ballance between collectivism and strong individualism which for lack of a better term I will call anarchy.

That is because you are either a collectivist arguing for collectivism or you are a anarchist arguing for anarchism.

Doesn't your Bible, your God, your religion command that you find peace and happiness and to be content with your existence as given to you? That suffering is "holy"?

I'm neither an anarchist nor a collectivist. I'm a passive realist optimistically hoping mankind works toward an altruistic society, because we have mastered the constraints of our hunger and vulnerability and can thrive without the threat of hungry masses. I know mankind is selfish, psychotic and self destructive, by nature. That is evident in its governments.

But, life is short. Why spend it trying to change government, religion or anything other than attacking one's own personal constraints, wherever they may be. It's easier to change one's own environment, one's own mind, than it is to change society and its governments.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

We are half way to a clean data set by my estimation.

That is if I can correctly summarize your view on the origins of your rights to be that they come from yourself in lue of a god or creator, but by preferance over social norms/governmental laws.

If that is accurate then I only need to know if you feel your current society/government deserves/needs more authority/control/over sight over your daily activities, or if you feel your current form of society/government should have/ is warranted less control/oversight/authority over your daily activities than it currently has?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Doesn't your Bible, your God, your religion command that you find peace and happiness and to be content with your existence as given to you? That suffering is "holy"?

Mine doesn't. I think you have been misinformed about Christianity (assuming that is the religion you refer to).

TheRedneck

I'm going to pull away from the "God Given rights" statement and say we have inalienable rights.

Personal rights held by an individual which are not bestowed by law, custom, or belief, and which cannot be taken or given away, or transferred to another person, are referred to as “inalienable rights.”

The whole God given thing is a little sketchy as to what God a person is suggesting is giving those rights, and if they can giveth then they can taketh away...Hell anyone?

Saying "inalienable" means even God can not take them away...

Now the reality is you only have rights that those in power wish you to have. Think of how fast you could find yourself in Gitmo for 50 years as example...So I would say you only have rights you are willing to defend and fight for. With COVID we have seen just how fast your inalienable rights can we whisked away in an instant. We have seen with the WOKE left just how fast you can be canceled into oblivion...

Rights are not written in stone, they are written in blood...

a reply to: Stevenmonet

I suppose if we are talking about “human rights” the question answers itself, “human rights” come from humans.

a reply to: TheRedneck

"Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth."

This is not in the Bible, but it is fairly representative of Christianity today.

The Serenity Prayer
God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
Taking, as He did, this sinful world
as it is, not as I would have it;
Trusting that He will make all things right
if I surrender to His Will;
That I may be reasonably happy in this life
and supremely happy with Him
Forever in the next.
Amen.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

And yet the meek starve to death by the millions whilst the few reside in there ivory towers and wag the dogs tail from afar.

Might not be much left to inherit once the current mob with there hand on the buttons and a finger in every pie are finished with the place.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: TheRedneck

"Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth."

This is not in the Bible, but it is fairly representative of Christianity today.

The Serenity Prayer
God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
Taking, as He did, this sinful world
as it is, not as I would have it;
Trusting that He will make all things right
if I surrender to His Will;
That I may be reasonably happy in this life
and supremely happy with Him
Forever in the next.
Amen.

But then you have those pesky humans getting into it all messing everything up.

For some reason you feel Christians follow some set path in life and whatever good or evil comes into their lives it is God's will and so just take it all and be happy no matter what....

We also have this thing called freedom of choice right? And that choice can be good or evil, so human actions are not Gods will, but human will, and its that will one can struggle against in many ways.

a reply to: andy06shake

And yet the meek starve to death by the million whilst the few reside in there ivory towers and wag the dogs tail from afar.

The plebs will starve no matter. Take the Siege of Jerusalem, in 70 CE. The zealots thought they could fight against Roman Tyranny. The Romans surrounded the city, wouldn't let anyone in or out, until the population starved to death.

a reply to: Xtrozero

The OP is coming from a Christian viewpoint, and yet has pigeonholed us into either collectivism or anarchism, while Christianity is politically passive.

As for me, I choose my battles.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

The plebs will starve no matter. Take the Siege of Jerusalem, in 70 CE. The zealots thought they could fight against Roman Tyranny. The Romans surrounded the city, wouldn't let anyone in or out, until the population starved to death.

Humans are not a nice animal...We are the Velociraptor of the mammal world, and that evil alien race that goes to a planet and rapes and plunders all it resources and eats anything that moves.......is us

a reply to: Xtrozero

So which one is it, freewill or predestination?

Because ones not exactly synonymous with the other.

And apparently Gods got a infallible plan.

a reply to: Stevenmonet

Rights are invented and given by men. But they are designed to protect the god-given freedoms we are born with.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Somehow i imagine you may be correct.

Progress my arse all the same.

We are the same animal now we are back then, just with better toys and technology in tow.

Which is part and parcel of the problem i imagine.