Current events discussion

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

At what age does the "gov't, gov't and gov't and occasionally other social structures" tell me what religion I am allowed to believe in? How do they do it? Do I get a certificate of eligibility?
How about my free speech? Was there a test? Did I get the right ata certain age?

How come no one knows about this methodology of rights bestowment but you?


So you are sure that society has gotten it wrong since 1700 years before Christ, but you are unable to explain how/when/by whom these rights are "geven" to us as humans?

How old were you when the "government" told you that you were allowed to believe in a god?
Did they give you a plaque, or certificate, or maybe some form of ID that you received the right?

Here's the thing: If you are 100% sure that human rights are not innate, then you should be 100% able to answer the questions of how.when/by whom they are bestowed.

I'm not buying that you're so stupid that you can't comprehend how rights flow from the gov't. Either you honestly don't have the intelligence to understand it, in which case it cannot be explained to you because you simply lack the intelligence. Or you're just playing stupid games, like asking about my "free speech certificate." Either way either you're really stupid or playing stupid. Count me out.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

So nobody is gonna comment about jd Vance being obsessed with UFO's? That's the VP, that's quite a statement...

So is Joe Rogan and he may rival JD Vance for influence.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I'm not buying that you're so stupid that you can't comprehend how rights flow from the gov't. Either you honestly don't have the intelligence to understand it, in which case it cannot be explained to you because you simply lack the intelligence. Or you're just playing stupid games, like asking about my "free speech certificate." Either way either you're really stupid or playing stupid. Count me out.

You make the declaration but cannot prove it in the least, which is telling.

If rights "flow from the government" as you claim, then you are saying that human rights are not innate, and that they are different under every government.
If the Chinese government decides a person should die because they don't see the value of that person, you think the person does not have a RIGHT to life?
If the Russian government decides to imprison and starve someone for opposing Putin, you think the person does not have a RIGHT to sustenance?
If the North Korean government decides a person shall not believe in Christianity, then the person does not have a RIGHT to do so?
WOW.

You are denying what has been expressed for over 3,700 years, which is that we have rights by birth.

It cannot be "explained to me" that we do not because your claim doesn't pass the most simple logical test, which is to explain HOW/WHEN/WHERE/BY WHOM these rights are suddenly bestowed on a human by a government.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

You make the declaration but cannot prove it in the least, which is telling.

If rights "flow from the government" as you claim, then you are saying that human rights are not innate, and that they are different under every government.
If the Chinese government decides a person should die because they don't see the value of that person, you think the person does not have a RIGHT to life?
If the Russian government decides to imprison and starve someone for opposing Putin, you think the person does not have a RIGHT to sustenance?
If the North Korean government decides a person shall not believe in Christianity, then the person does not have a RIGHT to do so?
WOW.

You are denying what has been expressed for over 3,700 years, which is that we have rights by birth.

It cannot be "explained to me" that we do not because your claim doesn't pass the most simple logical test, which is to explain HOW/WHEN/WHERE/BY WHOM these rights are suddenly bestowed on a human by a government.

That's exactly how it works. The gov't (for the most part) determines our rights. For example, a bunch of Trump supporters thought they had the right to storm the capitol. Turns out they were wrong, they don't have that right. And who determined they don't have that right - the gov't.

Your very job is to act as an agent for the gov't and "punish" people that they had the right to defraud the gov't

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

That's exactly how it works. The gov't (for the most part) determines our rights. For example, a bunch of Trump supporters thought they had the right to storm the capitol. Turns out they were wrong, they don't have that right. And who determined they don't have that right - the gov't.

Your very job is to act as an agent for the gov't and "punish" people that they had the right to defraud the gov't

You seem to be confusing having a right, but being punished for exercising the right in violation of the law.

You have the right to free speech. It is innate. You are born with it.
HOWEVER, if you use that right to incite a panic and people get hurt, you can face punishment.

People have the RIGHT to free choice of whether they will break a law or not.
Having that right to choose doesn't absolve them of punishment if they do break a law and get caught.

Are you under the impression that a law against an action takes away your right to commit the action?
Do you think that since it is illegal to incite a riot with speech, that you have to right to free speech?
The scumbags who stormed the Capitol had the right to act of their won free will. But their act was illegal. The legality doesn't take away their right to act of their own free will.

Aside from our very own Declaration Of Independence stating we have inalienable rights (innate and born with), the first known explicitly "human rights" document dates to 539BC.

How about freedom? Do you think humans have an innate right to be free from slavery, or they are only given that specific right at some point in their lives?

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

Vance is swamp creature imo...I rarely think anything about hom

I agree with that

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

"HHS Determines mRNA Jabs Prolonged COVID-19 Pandemic"

https://www.infowars.com/posts/hhs-determines-mrna-jabs-prolonged-covid-19-pandemic-rfk-sounds-alarm-on-disturbing-organ-harvesting-racket

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

And he'll be right.

Let's test it!!!

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

You seem to be confusing having a right, but being punished for exercising the right in violation of the law.

You have the right to free speech. It is innate. You are born with it.
HOWEVER, if you use that right to incite a panic and people get hurt, you can face punishment.

People have the RIGHT to free choice of whether they will break a law or not.
Having that right to choose doesn't absolve them of punishment if they do break a law and get caught.

Are you under the impression that a law against an action takes away your right to commit the action?
Do you think that since it is illegal to incite a riot with speech, that you have to right to free speech?
The scumbags who stormed the Capitol had the right to act of their won free will. But their act was illegal. The legality doesn't take away their right to act of their own free will.

Aside from our very own Declaration Of Independence stating we have inalienable rights (innate and born with), the first known explicitly "human rights" document dates to 539BC.

How about freedom? Do you think humans have an innate right to be free from slavery, or they are only given that specific right at some point in their lives?

No humans don't have the inate right to be free from slavery. They have an inate desire to not be enslaved. In Colorado, a baby doesn't even have a right to life until it exits the womb because the gov't says as long it's in the womb. Or another way to look at it is, mothers (and doctors) have the right to deletus the ***** as long as it's in the womb. Yet, a random person doesn't have the right to assault a mother and end her pregnancy. And who is charge of all these decisions and enforcing them? Last I checked it was the gov't.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

You seem to be confusing having a right, but being punished for exercising the right in violation of the law.

If the Government didn't give us the rights, how can they punish us for exercising them?

You have the right to free speech. It is innate. You are born with it.
HOWEVER, if you use that right to incite a panic and people get hurt, you can face punishment.

How can one cause anyone to do anything with their speech. Speech is a formless entity. Air rushing over vocal cords to make sound. There is nothing physical about it that can force a person to do anything. What you are describing is placing blame on someone else for your own actions instead of accepting responsibility for your own actions.

People have the RIGHT to free choice of whether they will break a law or not.
Having that right to choose doesn't absolve them of punishment if they do break a law and get caught.

See above.

Are you under the impression that a law against an action takes away your right to commit the action?
Do you think that since it is illegal to incite a riot with speech, that you have to right to free speech?
The scumbags who stormed the Capitol had the right to act of their won free will. But their act was illegal. The legality doesn't take away their right to act of their own free will.

See above.

Aside from our very own Declaration Of Independence stating we have inalienable rights (innate and born with), the first known explicitly "human rights" document dates to 539BC.

How about freedom? Do you think humans have an innate right to be free from slavery, or they are only given that specific right at some point in their lives?

Now you want to argue morality.

People have free will. No words spoken by another can MAKE you do something. Everything done is a choice made by the individual doing it.

As far as laws and being punished for exercising your rights. What good are rights if laws are used to keep you from exercising them out of fear of punishment? It is a form of control by those who make laws. You are given the false belief that you have a choice, that you have rights... exercise the wrong one and BAM!!! You're screwed.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

If the Government didn't give us the rights, how can they punish us for exercising them?

How can one cause anyone to do anything with their speech. Speech is a formless entity. Air rushing over vocal cords to make sound. There is nothing physical about it that can force a person to do anything. What you are describing is placing blame on someone else for your own actions instead of accepting responsibility for your own actions.

See above.

See above.

Now you want to argue morality.

People have free will. No words spoken by another can MAKE you do something. Everything done is a choice made by the individual doing it.

As far as laws and being punished for exercising your rights. What good are rights if laws are used to keep you from exercising them out of fear of punishment? It is a form of control by those who make laws. You are given the false belief that you have a choice, that you have rights... exercise the wrong one and BAM!!! You're screwed.

It seems so simple, yet Rob wants to turn it into some sort of exercise in philosophy & self-determination. And he's welcome to do those mental gymnastics all he wants, but why he feels compelled to rope us into us beyond me.

I can only laugh at his inability to understand govt's role in our rights. Rob is literally an agent of the gov't restricting people's access to gov't funds. Or put another way, protecting the taxpayer's right to not be robbed. Those aren't some inate rights just floating around in the ether.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

It seems so simple, yet Rob wants to turn it into some sort of exercise in philosophy & self-determination. And he's welcome to do those mental gymnastics all he wants, but why he feels compelled to rope us into us beyond me.

I can only laugh at his inability to understand govt's role in our rights. Rob is literally an agent of the gov't restricting people's access to gov't funds. Or put another way, protecting the taxpayer's right to not be robbed. Those aren't some inate rights just floating around in the ether.

This guy lives in his own weird and sheltered world. The problem with that is he never learned how to think for himself because everything was always done for him... until a republican came along and caused some kind of trauma in his life. That's when the far left found him. In them he has something telling him what to do and think. So he does. Unless the far left wakes him up to reality, old boy is doomed.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

"HHS Determines mRNA Jabs Prolonged COVID-19 Pandemic"

https://www.infowars.com/posts/hhs-determines-mrna-jabs-prolonged-covid-19-pandemic-rfk-sounds-alarm-on-disturbing-organ-harvesting-racket

That makes no logical sense. Omicron helped end the pandemic rather prolong it. As a matter of fact, I'd say we could have stopped "countermeasures" once it became obvious that omicron was the dominant strain and immune to the vax.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

This guy lives in his own weird and sheltered world. The problem with that is he never learned how to think for himself because everything was always done for him... until a republican came along and caused some kind of trauma in his life. That's when the far left found him. In them he has something telling him what to do and think. So he does. Unless the far left wakes him up to reality, old boy is doomed.

I don't think the left has people "telling them what do and think." It’s not like they tune into MSNBC & CNN in meaningful numbers. Look up collective narcissism, that seems to describe today's left and their collective behavior.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

I don't think the left has people "telling them what do and think." It’s not like they tune into MSNBC & CNN in meaningful numbers. Look up collective narcissism, that seems to describe today's left and their collective behavior.

And the whole time they claim they are critical thinkers and unbiased...yet there's crickets when you ask them to name something about their team they don't agree with