Stephen168
New member
Who is we?
Last edited:
- Status
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
This decision was made by court of less than twenty men and that’s the only reason it is legal. Slavery was also legal at one point so this argument has no merit at all.
Last edited:
H
Hume
Guest
Freewill is one of the tenets of natural rights from the age of reason chuckle
Last edited:
Stephen168
New member
So you have changed your mind, you now accept that we have natural rights?
Last edited:
H
Hume
Guest
When liberty conflicts there are at least 2 people. Apropos, “we”.
Ethics don’t exist for individuals.
Last edited:
H
Hume
Guest
No, merely letting you know that your preferred moral schema has freewill as a core tenet.Hume:
So you have changed your mind, you now accept that we have natural rights?
So by rejecting my proposed default for natural rights, you didn’t get away from it. I’m a bit tickled by the fact.
Last edited:
Stephen168
New member
So you just made it up. ‘We’ would not included me or the founders of the United States.
H
Hume
Guest
Well, maybe not you… but the founders?Hume:
So you just made it up. ‘We’ would not included me or the founders of the United States.
-Mr. Tom Jefferson, Declaration of Independence
Last edited:
Stephen168
New member
I already knew that. I just don’t see the conflict you seem to see.
H
Hume
Guest
LOL, fair enough.
Reject my penny for another penny and proclaim it different if you want. lol.
Reject my penny for another penny and proclaim it different if you want. lol.
Stephen168
New member
Yes, natural rights not the Golden Rule.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
That’s not how laws are made. The government isn’t productive enough for that to be remotely true.
Last edited:
N
Neithan
Guest
This is simply you asserting things. Is–ought problem. Hume’s guillotine. I hope you haven’t overlooked it. We know that a fetus is not a parasite. That is biologically incorrect. Offspring are not parasites. You are saying it ought to be treated like one. That is distorting the facts to feign values, to empower a group over another group.
Somehow you think that distorting facts for empowerment of some adults is better than observing that all human life is a natural good and liberty is a natural right. You have not rationally justified your “moral default” position (of which your CAF namesake would be the first to point out to you) and only dismiss our responses or claim you have the majority position (appeal to the stone and appeal to the people). If majority rules, then it’s might makes right; it’s not the golden rule if it doesn’t apply to every human being.
Stephen168
New member
It is you that has rejected natural rights and I that have proposed it.
It is the founding ethic of the United States.
Stephen168
New member
Which can be accomplished outside of intercourse.
H
Hume
Guest
Well, not in the way you want it to be, but this is a democracy and as one who supports the authoritarian forced-birth ethic, your view is a little out of vogue.
All I’m saying is that free moral agency appears to be transcendingly fundamental - to the point it really does appear to be our moral null.
In that context, if you think w woman should lose her moral agency simply because she caught pregnant, make your case!
I don’t think enslavement can be argued for in a society that views individual freedom as a given, so GL.
I’m so tired of saying this… I DO personally acknowledge at least some marginal “right to life” in that it’s what will likely occur if the woman does nothing to stop it. Where we differ is where you think that assumed right is sufficient to override a woman’s control over her own body - her most sacred property in a society that places enormous emphasis on property rights.
She. Owes. The. Use. Of. Her. Body. To. No. One.
It’s granted freely and denied freely as a matter of liberty.
Moreover, it’s more empowering for adults because those are actually people in a way children aren’t and the unborn certainly aren’t. This is no surprise!
How many rights do you gain when you turn 18? Then 21? Then 25 and 30 (congress) then 35?
Personhood is progressive. It’s why the 30 year old man can vote and the 13 year old cannot.
Oh for heaven’s sake, I like his writing. Using him as an avatar is not 100% endorsement. It’s a little pedantic I need to remind someone of this…
H
Hume
Guest
Sure, like deism was the founding religion of the United States.
Would you like to argue that we all must be deists?
At any rate, thrilled we can at least agree on the fundamental importance of individual liberty.
Let’s let the ladies have theirs too, right?
Last edited:
H
Hume
Guest
Sure, but why deny intercourse?
Our primate cousins will engage in a little just to blow of some steam. No observable reproductive intent at all…
Stephen168
New member
The United States has never had a state religion.
Seems like a red herring. This has nothing to do with me claiming there are natural rights and you rejecting them. Then claiming the opposite.
Yes, life, liberty, and property are natural rights, you said you reject the idea of natural rights, and life in particular.
Of course, ladies of all creeds, ages, colors, and national origin.
H
Hume
Guest
Well, they all invoked the ideals of their masonic “God of the Philosophers” in their underlying assumptions.
Lol, I’ve done no such thing.
You rejected individual liberty in favor of… natural rights which entails individual liberty as one of the more fundamental tenets.
I see you’re still trying to recover from that by spinning that on me somehow.
Don’t worry about it. We all err all the time. If you let it go I will too.
I reject the idea because I’m not superstitious. There probably isn’t a god and “nature” hasn’t conferred any more rights on you than it conferred on the mosquito I killed while walking today.
If you wish to discuss any specific right - lets do so!
Fantastic!
So choice is ethical in your view? That’s progress, friends.
Last edited:
- Status