- 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 4/2/26 at 8:14 am to 4cubbies
Posted on 4/2/26 at 8:14 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Do we, though? We don't teach feelings of guilt.
Guilt is only felt if someone realizes they did wrong. That is where the teaching comes into play.
Disclaimer...not all of us are the same. The youngest seemed to be much more empathetic than his brother. Still he had to be taught property rights. I say this because all of these natural rights stem from property rights. No matter what the holier than me try to say.
1
Posted on 4/2/26 at 8:23 am to gaetti15
quote:
ETA: and then cubbies claims shes Catholic and use to or current teaches RCIA and then she has threads like this (and many others) where I guess im alittle worried about what kinda information she floats out there to those kids.
Feel free to volunteer to spend time with other people's teenagers to counteract my corruption.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 8:26 am to UtahCajun
quote:
Guilt is only felt if someone realizes they did wrong. That is where the teaching comes into play.
I guess it's impossible to know this but it seems like people can or would feel guilt without being "taught" morality.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 8:32 am to Mike da Tigah
No such thing as "rights".
We are just here. Go ask NK about rights. Even if you believe they have some, that doesn't do them much good.
They don't exist. You hope someone or something with more might doesn't come by and stop you from living your life. If they do, you fight back. You may win, you may lose. That's the world.
We are just here. Go ask NK about rights. Even if you believe they have some, that doesn't do them much good.
They don't exist. You hope someone or something with more might doesn't come by and stop you from living your life. If they do, you fight back. You may win, you may lose. That's the world.
This post was edited on 4/2/26 at 8:33 am
Posted on 4/2/26 at 8:53 am to 4cubbies
quote:
I guess it's impossible to know this but it seems like people can or would feel guilt without being "taught" morality.
I am more than sure some can, but we are not all the same.
As stated, my youngest seemed to know that violence was bad from the get go. The oldest, another story. He thought violence was how to get what he wanted immediately. He is 36 now and is very mellow. Strange how that worked out.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 11:51 am to UtahCajun
quote:My kids knew right from wrong from an early age. They knew it was wrong to steal and lie and to hurt others, because they knew they didn’t like it when others did that to them.
If this were true, we would not have to teach right from wrong.
Heck, we wouldn't even have this topic, we would all instinctually know. But of course, we do not.
Knowledge isn’t the issue. Kids lack discipline, which is why parents provide that to their kids, to teach them that they shouldn’t be selfish and do the things they don’t want others to do to them.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 12:46 pm to uziyourillusion
"You're confusing 'Rights' with 'Privileges' granted by the Subversive Triad.
THE FORENSIC AUDIT:
THE 1812 CEILING: Your rights aren't 'man-made' or 'God-given' in a vacuum—they are Property Interests established by the 1812 Act of Admission. You are a Sovereign Successor to the Land.
THE 1933 CAPTURE: Man 'takes them away' because you’ve been 'Deemed' an 'Ally of the Enemy' under the TWEA (1933) to service a bankrupt estate. You’re trading your 1812 Substance for War Script (FRNs).
THE OATH VACUUM (LRS 42:162): They can only 'take' what you surrender. If the 'Officer' taking your rights hasn't filed a Publicly Recorded Sworn Oath, he's a private actor committing Criminal Anarchy (LRS 14:134).
Rights don't vanish; you just stopped auditing the Receipts.
— Militia Elder / Al Scramuzza"
THE FORENSIC AUDIT:
THE 1812 CEILING: Your rights aren't 'man-made' or 'God-given' in a vacuum—they are Property Interests established by the 1812 Act of Admission. You are a Sovereign Successor to the Land.
THE 1933 CAPTURE: Man 'takes them away' because you’ve been 'Deemed' an 'Ally of the Enemy' under the TWEA (1933) to service a bankrupt estate. You’re trading your 1812 Substance for War Script (FRNs).
THE OATH VACUUM (LRS 42:162): They can only 'take' what you surrender. If the 'Officer' taking your rights hasn't filed a Publicly Recorded Sworn Oath, he's a private actor committing Criminal Anarchy (LRS 14:134).
Rights don't vanish; you just stopped auditing the Receipts.
— Militia Elder / Al Scramuzza"
Posted on 4/2/26 at 1:12 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
My kids knew right from wrong from an early age. They knew it was wrong to steal and lie and to hurt others, because they knew they didn’t like it when others did that to them.
Sounds like you are selling your parenting skills short. If they knew from an early age, you did a damn good job.
quote:
Knowledge isn’t the issue. Kids lack discipline, which is why parents provide that to their kids, to teach them that they shouldn’t be selfish and do the things they don’t want others to do to them.
Knowledge is always the issue with beings who know nothing yet. They are a spong.
You did good. Quit being humble and take the credit.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 3:38 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Verbosity demonstrates confusion.
Link?
quote:
Brevity demonstrates clarity.
Again, according to whom? It's obviously false. Watch...
Tyrannosaurus bus.
That was only two words. Is it clear to you what I mean by it?
quote:
I don’t mistake long-winded rambling for substance
You do apparently mistake an ad hom attack as a substantive argument, though.
I write too much.
What a sick burn.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 3:41 pm to Odysseus32
quote:
No such thing as "rights" We are just here. Go ask NK about rights. Even if you believe they have some, that doesn't do them much good. They don't exist. You hope someone or something with more might doesn't come by and stop you from living your life. If they do, you fight back. You may win, you may lose. That's the world.
This is just textbook mral nihilism. Nothing is truly right or wrong, just or unjust. . A more accurate term, as I think about i,t might be Amoral Realism-it explains how POWER works while completely abandoning any claim that the use of power can be judged. That's not a valid refutation of natural rights; it's simply an admission that you've abandoned any standard by which power can be evaluated.
You've reduced morality to force, which explains power but cannot explain injustice. If there are no natural rights, then nothing in North Korea is wrong.You haven't disproven natural rights, you've just described a world where natural rights are violated and that violation is called proof that they don't exist.
And once you take that position, you lose the ability to call ANYTHING unjust, including the very world you are pointing to. If your view is right (it's not btw) then NOTHING HAS EVER BEEN UNJUST, only won or lost. That's not moral or political philosophy. it's just surrender to power.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 4:38 pm to 4cubbies
quote:How is it murky? The 10 commandments reveal several rights in and of themselves, such as the right to worship God, to worship Him as He's commanded, to have children, for heterosexual marriage, the right to life, and the right to personal property.quote:This gets murky for me.
the truth God has revealed about our rights
quote:God commands us to act justly. Just because it may not always be perfect justice doesn't mean we should not seek to act justly.
I believe God can enact justice after our deaths. I question whether or not humans can achieve justice with our complicated and flawed systems.
Recall that we have a better ability at times to be more sure that justice is served in our society than they did back when God was command the Israelites to act justly, including using the death penalty. Justice was more likely to be flawed then than now, and yet you and others think we shouldn't seek to act justly because it's imperfect. That doesn't make sense to me.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 4:41 pm to UtahCajun
quote:Thanks, but I think you missed my point
Sounds like you are selling your parenting skills short. If they knew from an early age, you did a damn good job.
I'm not saying all children intellectually know what stealing is, or the definition of harm or lying. I'm saying that children experience what it is like to receive injustice, harm, and deception from an early age, and they know they don't like it, even if they don't know why. This extends into their growth and development as they learn to avoid those things and even learn to use them for their own gain.
Even those who have never been exposed to Christian ethics understand these things.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 5:19 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
I'm not saying all children intellectually know what stealing is, or the definition of harm or lying. I'm saying that children experience what it is like to receive injustice, harm, and deception from an early age, and they know they don't like it, even if they don't know why. This extends into their growth and development as they learn to avoid those things and even learn to use them for their own gain.
Even those who have never been exposed to Christian ethics understand these things
My point is
If all of that is endowed, by the creator, learning it would be uneeded.
Kinda what endowed means.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 11:34 pm to UtahCajun
quote:Why would understanding not be needed?
My point is
If all of that is endowed, by the creator, learning it would be uneeded.
Kinda what endowed means
Many people “know” it is wrong to steal and murder, but without such knowledge being based on an objective moral truth in God, such “knowledge” is actually not knowledge at all, but mere preference or opinion.
What we “know” instinctually is actually supported rationally through God’s moral law as revealed in the Scriptures. It provides a rational basis for what we already believe to be true, and provides clarity to what can otherwise be less clear in terms of application.
Posted on 4/3/26 at 6:56 am to Lsupimp
I've never said anything about things being moral or thing being just or unjust. I have a deep sense of right and wrong. That doesn't negate the claim that you're not born with any natural right in this world. I'll even concede the possibility that you are born with it. My point is that it doesn't matter.
If one has rights, and they feel strongly, they should fight for those rights. I think North Korea is abhorrent and they should fight. The truth is that many thousands will die doing so. that also doesn't mean that powers also have to subscribe to the same line of thinking.
If one has rights, and they feel strongly, they should fight for those rights. I think North Korea is abhorrent and they should fight. The truth is that many thousands will die doing so. that also doesn't mean that powers also have to subscribe to the same line of thinking.
This post was edited on 4/3/26 at 6:58 am
Posted on 4/3/26 at 7:56 am to Odysseus32
You just confirmed everything I said to you. You are making an argument about POWER, friend . Power is a completely separate argument than Natural Rights . You have Natural right to own your time. That doesn’t mean that I can’t capture you, restrain you and force you to use your time to do my bidding. It just means that I am using power to violate your natural rights.
Also acknowledging the terms “ just” or “ unjust” IS an acknowledgement that you accept the existence of Natural Rights. It is an acknowledgement that some moral concepts about what is right or wrong are hardwired into our moral being, not just human constructs as the materialists on this thread claim. One can not say that slavery is unjust for instance, without acknowledging JUST, which is an acknowledgement that there are moral principles above and beyond man’s law.
I can kidnap you. That’s power. Is is an Injustice? Yes. That’s an acknowledgement of Natural Law. You have a God given right- which you sense and feel and know- it’s in every fiber of your humanity-to your own autonomy to walk in any direction your body chooses that does not infringe on the natural rights of others.
Also acknowledging the terms “ just” or “ unjust” IS an acknowledgement that you accept the existence of Natural Rights. It is an acknowledgement that some moral concepts about what is right or wrong are hardwired into our moral being, not just human constructs as the materialists on this thread claim. One can not say that slavery is unjust for instance, without acknowledging JUST, which is an acknowledgement that there are moral principles above and beyond man’s law.
I can kidnap you. That’s power. Is is an Injustice? Yes. That’s an acknowledgement of Natural Law. You have a God given right- which you sense and feel and know- it’s in every fiber of your humanity-to your own autonomy to walk in any direction your body chooses that does not infringe on the natural rights of others.
Posted on 4/3/26 at 8:00 am to Lsupimp
quote:
Power is a completely separate argument than Natural Rights .
Since you continue failing at giving a detailed operative definition of "Natural Rights", how can we even establish this?
You are falling into the trap of using vagueness and malleability to create a moving target while you willingly use the specificity and concreteness of the operative definitions of the opposing concepts you use to dismiss discussion about your arguments.
Since you refuse to define the terms used to establish your position, you can never be wrong, because you can always pivot to another version of the terms. Since you engage in defining the terms of responses to your argument, they are not given the same opportunity and are attacked from the pivoted versions of your concepts.
You're still doing that, days later.
Posted on 4/3/26 at 8:43 am to Lsupimp
You're arguing in circles.
Have fun.
Have fun.
Posted on 4/3/26 at 8:56 am to Odysseus32
quote:
I've never said anything about things being moral or thing being just or unjust.
A right is a moral entitlement based on the underpinning of justice.
You have opined on the nonexistence of rights.
If the absence of the objective existence of justice and morality are not connected to the non-existence of moral entitlements, can you please explain how you conceive of these elements?
It's not entirely necessary to connect them, but if they are not connected in your mind then there must be some other reason that you feel that moral entitlements based on justice do not exist, but morality and justice do.
Can you explain? Thanks in advance.
Page 17 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News