- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What is the source of our rights?
Posted on 3/30/26 at 1:39 pm to CleverUserName
Posted on 3/30/26 at 1:39 pm to CleverUserName
quote:
Annnnnd here comes the evolving narrative. Right on cue.
OK, so you only want to discuss what you currently believe and not hear anything that you don't already know and agree with?
"Don't post anything that I haven't already stated is fact or you're trying to have a discussion and I just want you to affirm my claims."
1
Posted on 3/30/26 at 1:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Your definition and derivation are shifting as you see fit. You're all over the place...
In other words, you lack the capacity to understand what Natural Law is. Because I gave you very simple definitions that have existed for hundreds of years of political philosophy. Are you unfamiliar with these simple concepts?
quote:
...but I'm not shocked, after that comment.
Which one of us voted for Trump and which opposed him, in large part, for his propensity for growing the state?
And don't try to debase yourself with whataboutism or emotional-based arguments built around fear
You seem overwrought. Are you ok? Do you need help? Shall I call someone on your behalf? I gave you the correct answers. Who we voted for is entirely irrelevant to your questions and my entirely correct answers. You will never see me make an argument that Trump is not a Statist. He is an enormous Statist. As are you. No shame in that-just correctly designating you.
Maybe you could just take on my argument instead of melting into a puddle?
Posted on 3/30/26 at 1:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Your definition and derivation are shifting as you see fit. You're all over the place...
In other words, you lack the capacity to understand what Natural Law is. Because I gave you very simple definitions that have existed for hundreds of years of political philosophy. Are you unfamiliar with these simple concepts?
quote:
...but I'm not shocked, after that comment.
Which one of us voted for Trump and which opposed him, in large part, for his propensity for growing the state?
And don't try to debase yourself with whataboutism or emotional-based arguments built around fear
You seem overwrought. Are you ok? Do you need help? Shall I call someone on your behalf? I gave you the correct answers. Who we voted for is entirely irrelevant to your questions and my entirely correct answers. You will never see me make an argument that Trump is not a Statist. He is an enormous Statist. As are you. No shame in that-just correctly designating you.
Maybe you could just take on my argument instead of melting into a puddle?
Posted on 3/30/26 at 1:41 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
I'm still failing to see the revenue generation for the state.
quote:
LINK
I love how our resident academic runs to AI for answers. The Fordham law news?? Really? Got anything from the Atlantic or Rolling stone? And what you have claimed is almost verbatim what is in one of these articles used by your AI research. Articles written by someone who:
"worked as a columnist and reporter for news outlets including the Portland Phoenix, Marijuana Moment, and Shadowproof"
Now you are shown that you are a programmed drone. Do you choose to continue living that way?
You know what would really peel back the bullshite here..... showing me where the cost to the state is less than this "revenue". That actually proves you right. Not some crap opinion piece from a former columnist from "Marijuana Moment".
I will never stopped being astounded at how easy you people are programmed completely with one sided garbage.
This post was edited on 3/30/26 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 3/30/26 at 1:42 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Are you disputing that rich people get away with their crimes?
I'm disputing your opinion that the people that are in prison are due to their economic status.
quote:
I have a growing list of research tasks that have been assigned to me in this thread so far.
Then the tip usually is, if you are going to say something that is hotly contested, be prepared to back it up. Again, i find it strange for you to bring Trump up in this, when there is so many other things to debate in this thread.
FWIW, YOU are the one bringing up all these extracurricular topics.
Posted on 3/30/26 at 1:44 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
OK, so you only want to discuss what you currently believe and not hear anything that you don't already know and agree with?
No. You run from one topic to another when you get cornered or don't get a sufficient response you can post from AI.
Just like you running away from the topic of the turnaround in homicide rates in El Salvador.
This post was edited on 3/30/26 at 1:48 pm
Posted on 3/30/26 at 2:05 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
But in practice, these rights depend heavily on the people defining and enforcing them. People in Papua New Guinea don’t have the same rights we do, so calling them “universal” feels more theoretical than accurate.
If we're only talking about Westerners, or Americans, then those rights are Natural or Universal.
"In practice" is irrelevant. You are confusing political philosophy and Natural Law with the human desire to hold power or authority over the lives of others What you call "theoretical" supersedes law because it is "natural". Your right not to be punched in the nose by angry, belligerent PTers is a natural and a codified law and it is not invalidated if you travel to New Guinea. You have a natural right not to be summarily executed by the government of North Korea whether you are or not.
Also, I did not say "universal". I said "natural". We are discussing natural rights-not the idea that natural rights being deprived by either an individual or The State in another geographic location magically invalidates a natural right. I have a natural right to own private property or to not be arbitrarily physically harmed, If the Grim Council of Stern White Ladies Auxiliary of Berkeley somehow manages to take a natural right from me, it does not follow that said Natural Right is invalid. It just says that someone has decided not to respect Natural Law.
Posted on 3/30/26 at 3:19 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
In other words, you lack the capacity to understand what Natural Law is.
I think you're avoiding analysis of what a "natural law" is, and being unable to give a single operative definition and remain within that framing, is showing that. The inability to give a comprehensive list is also telling.
You're deferring to fluffy language and a vague deity reference, shifting around with all the malleability that strategy gives you, and then attempting to criticize me for pointing this out
quote:
You seem overwrought.
Not at all. I'm laughing.
quote:
Who we voted for is entirely irrelevant to your questions and my entirely correct answers.
It's entirely relevant to your choice to use the word "statist" incorrectly and hypocritically. Are you denying that you tried to label me as the statist, now?
That's why I quoted that language to make those comments.
Posted on 3/30/26 at 3:23 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
"In practice" is irrelevant.
It's quite relevant if you want to have an actual conversation instead of resting on fluffy language that says very little of substance.
You can't even decide if a god or logic defines these rights.
And the people who created that fluffy language you keep citing without analysis make the "in practice" part quite relevant. If those people, who created the language you keep copying, couldn't properly understand the concepts, why do you think you can "logically derive" other rights from their miscommunication/misunderstanding?
Or are you going to try to side step their "in practice" issues entirely and pivot to the religious-adjacent "well men aren't perfect" angle in order to avoid analysis?
Posted on 3/30/26 at 4:52 pm to CleverUserName
quote:
No. You run from one topic to another when you get cornered or don't get a sufficient response you can post from AI.
From AI? I posted a link to google.
I guess you need me to explicitly state that the government saves money by forcing inmates to produce goods in lieu of paying real employees to produce the same goods? That also contributes to wage suppression.
quote:
Just like you running away from the topic of the turnaround in homicide rates in El Salvador.
You brought up El Salvador. How is that not you “running from one topic to another when you get cornered”?
Posted on 3/30/26 at 4:53 pm to Mike da Tigah
God
Posted on 3/30/26 at 5:01 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
"In practice" is irrelevant.
Bestie, in practice is all that matters. We can talk all day about “should” and theoreticals but the only thing that matters is what actually happens in reality.
quote:
Your right not to be punched in the nose by angry, belligerent PTers is a natural and a codified law and it is not invalidated if you travel to New Guinea.
This right isn’t real. Anyone can punch me in the face at any time just like I can punch anyone else in the face at any time.
quote:. Private property is not natural.
I have a natural right to own private property
Posted on 3/30/26 at 5:03 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
This right isn’t real. Anyone can punch me in the face at any time just like I can punch anyone else in the face at any time.
So I can rape you at any time and that's cool?
You have no right to bodily autonomy? It's just an illusion? I've done nothing wrong or violated none of your rights by raping you because I could?
Posted on 3/30/26 at 5:13 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
From AI? I posted a link to google.
With articles written by biased idiots that have written such articulate and well balanced articles in Pulitzer Prize collecting periodicals such as the Portland Phoenix, Marijuana Moment, and Shadowproof. Really bringing hard hitting stuff there.
quote:
I guess you need me to explicitly state that the government saves money by forcing inmates to produce goods in lieu of paying real employees to produce the same goods? That also contributes to wage suppression.
Saves money? Woah woah woah woah woah woah. You said it's all about "revenue generation". And then gave examples of things not related to wages. And now we have curbed away from "revenue generation" (Commissary, prison phone calls, private prison contracts, prison labor, remember?) when AI couldnt show you a single instance of the Department of Corrections actually coming out ahead in this apparent goods producing industry.
What is something we buy every day thst is inmate produced and is in competition with the private sector?? Anything? What? What is a product being produced that is causing private sector wage suppression.
And if they are in prison.. which is coincidentally called "paying their debt to society", they should be doing something. And since they already have free healthcare, free meals, and free housing, they do not require a "livable wage".
quote:
You brought up El Salvador. How is that not you “running from one topic to another when you get cornered”?
Well.. you said this:
quote:
Anyway the board thinks laws and prison are what keeps people civilized.
And I directly rebutted your take with an actual country that turned your entire premise upside down. Then AI didn't do you any favors so you dropped it and went on to the absolute ridiculous tangent of "wage suppression".
Posted on 3/30/26 at 6:02 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
There are better questions
. . .
Much more important and salient questions
Says who?
This post was edited on 3/30/26 at 6:03 pm
Posted on 3/30/26 at 6:26 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
4cubbies
Crickets.
That's what I thought.
Posted on 3/30/26 at 6:27 pm to Mike da Tigah
Our rights are granted by God.
Posted on 3/30/26 at 6:40 pm to 4cubbies
The right to own private property is not only a NATURAL RIGHT is is likely the most important natural right. Your shoes belong to you. It's an indispensable right. As my bestie, and a woman of rare substance, I'd ask you to think about these terms a little harder,
BTW, your entire post is completely wrong. Utterly 100% incorrect. For instance, you made the rather lazy claim below:
Let me explain a bit to save you some time -private property is an extension of your life and liberty into the material world. You own yourself (your body, your time your labor). When you combine your time and labor with the world you create private property. Yuo create things, you buy things, you trade thing, you get to keep the results of your actions. This is a natural right. The right to private property secures your independence, it enables future planning, rewards creativity, stabilizes society-makes your Individual Liberty REAL in the material world.
In political philosophy-thing Plato, Aristotle, Locke etc- the most important natural rights are to Life, Liberty and Property. In short-if you don't own what you produce or buy or trade-you don't really own yourself. That's why you look at a country like North Korea and see it as being inextricably in opposition to natural rights, but you don't make the argument that natural rights don't exist.
Don't look for a reason to disagree, dear-think about it. It's self evident.
BTW, your entire post is completely wrong. Utterly 100% incorrect. For instance, you made the rather lazy claim below:
quote:
Private property is not natural.
Let me explain a bit to save you some time -private property is an extension of your life and liberty into the material world. You own yourself (your body, your time your labor). When you combine your time and labor with the world you create private property. Yuo create things, you buy things, you trade thing, you get to keep the results of your actions. This is a natural right. The right to private property secures your independence, it enables future planning, rewards creativity, stabilizes society-makes your Individual Liberty REAL in the material world.
In political philosophy-thing Plato, Aristotle, Locke etc- the most important natural rights are to Life, Liberty and Property. In short-if you don't own what you produce or buy or trade-you don't really own yourself. That's why you look at a country like North Korea and see it as being inextricably in opposition to natural rights, but you don't make the argument that natural rights don't exist.
Don't look for a reason to disagree, dear-think about it. It's self evident.
Posted on 3/30/26 at 6:46 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
private property is an extension of your life and liberty into the material world. You own yourself (your body, your time your labor). When you combine your time and labor with the world you create private property. Yuo create things, you buy things, you trade thing, you get to keep the results of your actions. This is a natural right. The right to private property secures your independence, it enables future planning, rewards creativity, stabilizes society-makes your Individual Liberty REAL in the material world.
These are all concepts of society, not nature or deities.
Do you honestly think hunter gatherers could even conceive of these concepts?
None of this stuff exists in nature
None of this stuff existed for humans for 95%+ or humans' time on earth.
quote:
Don't look for a reason to disagree, dear-think about it. It's self evident.
Except for 95% of our time on earth
Posted on 3/30/26 at 6:47 pm to samson73103
quote:
Our rights are granted by God.
You only have one right granted by God and that is the right to life. You were gifted it by God. All other "rights" are logical extensions of man's attempts to guarantee that basic right for everyone else in order for society to function.
This post was edited on 3/30/26 at 6:50 pm
Page 11 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News