Christianity

[Harbal]

So: you are not a free man. Your life, your liberty, your property, these aren't yours at all.

Yes, they are mine, unless someone comes to take them away from me and I am unable to stop them.

[henry quirk]

So: you are not a free man. Your life, your liberty, your property, these aren't yours at all.

Yes, they are mine, unless someone comes to take them away from me and I am unable to stop them.

No, if you do not believe your life, your liberty, your property is yours, naturally, inalienably, then you are merely privileged with them, allowed to keep them.

As I reckon it: if I am robbed or murdered, I have been wronged, my right to what is mine has been violated.

As you reckon it: if you are robbed or murdered, no wrong beyond the communal or legal has been committed. Plunk you down in a world where slavery is the norm and, to you, this okay (you may object, becuz you don't like it, but you have nuthin' else, you say you have no claim to yourself so you have no argument against slavery, or why you ought not be a slave).

[Harbal]

No, if you do not believe your life, your liberty, your property is yours, naturally, inalienably, then you are merely privileged with them, allowed to keep them.

As I reckon it: if I am robbed or murdered, I have been wronged, my right to what is mine has been violated.

As you reckon it: if you are robbed or murdered, no wrong beyond the communal or legal has been committed. Plunk you down in a world where slavery is the norm and, to you, this okay (you may object, becuz you don't like it, but you have nuthin' else, you say you have no claim to yourself so you have no argument against slavery, or why you ought not be a slave).

What you call natural rights are only rights that you grant to yourself, henry, and if you ever find yourself in a position where those rights are unenforceable they won't be worth very much, will they? It seems to me that the concept of rights only makes sense in the context of some authority that grants them and protects them on your behalf. Without that, you have no more right to be free than a farm animal does.

[Alexis Jacobi]

And, if you fail to, and henry goes to the grave following the dictates of reason and nature stuffed into him at conception by his own Deist God, is his soul still damned to Hell?

Befor’n he e’en git near da ENTRANCE t’hell he’s gotta spen’ a decade er so ‘mong peoples who talks like dis!

[promethean75]

Henry'n me don't much like yer kind, mister. Reckon you oughta mosey on now. We don't want no trouble, hear?

[promethean75]

*spits*

*twists boot heel in dirt to get a good footing*

[henry quirk]

What you call natural rights are only rights that you grant to yourself

Nope. Each man, every man, any where, any when, is free and has a natural, inalienable right to his, and no other's, life, liberty, and property.

That includes you.

*

if you ever find yourself in a position where those rights are unenforceable they won't be worth very much, will they?

Oh, they're everything, whether I successfully defend them or not, whether you choose to ignore them or disbelieve them.

You do know what inalienable means, yeah? What natural rights are?

*

It seems to me that the concept of rights only makes sense in the context of some authority that grants them and protects them on your behalf. Without that, you have no more right to be free than a farm animal does.

Nope. Even in the absence of authority I am mine...and you are yours.

But, let's stop. If you see yourself as akin to a farm animal, that's no skin offa my nose. I think better and more of you, but you are yours to denigrate or reduce as you like.

[henry quirk]

AJ, Pro,

When you guys are done...

A01EA3BD-DD23-439A-94E7-36CF11BE78BE.jpeg

...mebbe we can talk.

[promethean75]

I'm the shepherd mix on the left.

No u can't do that AJ I already called it bro.

[henry quirk]

Pro,

I take it you have no interest in conversation? If not, and as I have no interest in two-bit trollin', I'm inclined to clean up my forum view and put you in my penalty box. Your bud, biggy, is there as well as that alien eye-blisterer, age.

I'll let you think on it: let me know where you wanna be.

[Age]

xxx

[promethean75]

alright I'm in. what are we talking about. natural rights? okay i believe that 'rights' are conventions that intelligent, self-aware language using animals practice in social groups, usually facilitating the cooperation of the individuals involved... or else it wouldn't have evolved in human behavior. such 'rights', tho founded on nothing more than convention and agreement, have served to stabilize social groups. duddint matter on what 'rights' are founded, and the entire enlightenment, tho claiming to be born of reason and science, kept the christian morality while ridding itself of the religion. The very notion of intrinsic 'right' is absurd and trasymachus summed that up quite well.

now that tricky bastard Socrates did the same thing the enlightenment did with the Christianity; made the soul a logical thing through a series of well crafted arguments and deductions... took away the need of a 'god' (if there are to be 'rights') and argued that 'rights' can be founded on reason alone.

both of these are spooks. the enlightenment ideals (liberty, justice, equality, etc) and the god granted 'rights' (pick the religion).

basically a fellow has the capacity to do whatever he is both able to do and wants to do, and his 'rights' are incidental. paper work. it's the might that's the 'right' of the individual. to put it crudely, the idea of liberty can't stop a bullet, and you can debate and discuss the nature of 'rights' all night, if yuns want.  

[henry quirk]

okay i believe that 'rights' are conventions

I know.

What else you got beyond 'Natural Law, natural rights, and free will are fictions, bruh' ?

Where's the beef?

[promethean75]

well actually that's what I'm aksing you. where's the beef and what are these mysterious 'rights'?

what does the statement 'this is my right!' mean when you file a report to have your stolen property returned? the returning of stolen property is just some arbitrary physical act, ritual, procedure. they get the guy and you get your stuff back.

the actual cognitive content of the statement is exclamatory and emotive. it indicates that you a) don't like being stolen from and b) you expect the POleece to get your shit back.

but that tells me nothing but your opinion and what you'd like to happen. i still don't know what you mean by 'rights'. i know what the word means and what the concept may mean, but acknowledging that is hardly enough to establish that one ought to arrest the guy and give you your shit back. because it's your 'right'. in reality it's the converse; societies are composed of people with property so they organize a police state to protect personal property... then, later, they come to believe that these conventions are 'rights' because they are so widely recognized, established and protected by society. but that is all, henry quirk.

[henry quirk]

well actually that's what I'm aksing you. where's the beef and what are these mysterious 'rights'?

My evidence (the short version)...

Every man, no matter when or where, knows he is his own. No man, no matter when or where, believes he is meant to be property or a commodity. A man may resign himself to servitude when it appears there are no other options, but he never accepts it. With all the variety in cultures, in societies, in manners of governance, in convention, with all the insurmountable differences between men and groups of men, it's striking the one intuition all men share, no exceptions, is this deep-in-the-bones sense I am mine.

If this intuition were itself a convention, or some version of a survival instinct, you'd expect to find, across history, evidence of societies where slaves, for example, were happy to be slaved becuz they'd been taught to be or becuz autonomy had been bred out of them. No such evidence exists. Quite the opposite: slavery always involves capture and force and subversion which is exactly what you'd expect when not a soul believes it's his lot to be slaved, when he knows he is free.

So: I say you are a free man. Not as convention or as privilege or as bio-impulse, but only becuz you are free. I say your life (your existence, your being), your liberty (how you choose to be in the world, what you choose to do), your property (the products of your labor, what you fairly trade for) are yours. Not as convention or privilege or bio-impulse, but only becuz your life, liberty, and property are yours.

I say these natural rights are inalienable: no shifting or shifty cultural shenanigans makes them go away; no biological control (breeding, drugs, etc.) negates them. You can ignore them, violate them, but the man to who they belong will not shrug his shoulders and accept the violation. He never sez this is fine. Even when impotent to seek redress, he never accepts the violation.

There is an immutableness, an essentialness, to natural rights. They aren't optional. They are as real as fire. And as with fire, you can extinguish any particular example of them, but, as with fire, they are a feature of what is.

I don't expect this evidence to move you. In fact, I expect you to dig your heels in. I also don't expect any serious consideration of the evidence. In fact, I expect it all to be dismissed without consideration (or refutation). This ain't my first pony ride, I'm used to it (which is why you got the short version: ain't wastin' any more of my time than I have to).