• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Are rights objectively real?

haymarket said:
Your reply makes no sense as I asked YOU about YOUR statement YOU made in YOUR own 678.

Is it your contention that the USA today in 2016 does NOT have a republican form of government?
Click to expand...

william rea, wants rights talked about, and i repect his request that i don't talk about anything other then that, if you wish to talk in that subject of government ....create a thread, and i will join it.
 
Master PO said:
our laws are structured around natural rights, what can i tell you
Click to expand...

I demonstrated previously that rights are derived from laws via the biological mechanisms of Evolution. It is the only explanation that recognises genetic altruism in our species rather then entitlement.
 
The 15th and 19th Amendments to the Constitution prohibit the government from denying the right to vote to any U.S. citizen on account of “race, color, or previous condition of servitude” or sex. Other than those prohibitions, however, the Constitution gives States the power to set qualifications for voting, as long as these qualifications are “not discriminatory”, and do not violate the Constitution or any restrictions that Congress imposes in federal voting laws. (Constitution, Art. I, s.4) The Federal Voting Rights Act specifically gives states permission to enact laws to deny the right to vote to people for two reasons: “by reason of criminal conviction or mental incapacity.” [42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(a)(3)(B)]

Even though there’s no specific ‘right to vote’ in the Constitution, like the “right to free speech”, or the “right to bear arms”, there are general protections that apply. The right to vote has been recognized by the Supreme Court as a “liberty interest” protected under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. If a state interferes with a fundamental “liberty interest” of a US citizen, it cannot do so without “due process”, or in a way that violates the “equal protection” clause of the 14th amendment.

http://disabilityjustice.org/right-to-vote/
 
Master PO said:
no you asked be not to speak of government so i repected that request, ..are you withdrawing what you said earlier?
Click to expand...

Asked is not commanded. Your response is noted for what it was though.
 
William Rea said:
I demonstrated previously that rights are derived from laws via the biological mechanisms of Evolution. It is the only explanation that recognises genetic altruism in our species rather then entitlement.
Click to expand...

you demonstrated nothing, all you did was talk, and thats nothing
 
Master PO said:
did not answer my question did you?
Click to expand...

It's ok, I understand why you are picking fights and squabbling on every side issue rather than stay with the topic. It's fine, just don't expect me to follow you off on your tangents.

When you want to get back on topic I'll respond.
 
William Rea said:
As in, we don't worship him and revere every word he uttered?
Click to expand...

John Locke performed a very valuable service with is theories on natural law and natural rights. He did so at a time when Divine Right of kings was accepted as the reason for having an all powerful king. After all, if GOD himself picked the royal family - who dare disagree? Locke came along and said GOD also created man with certain natural rights and it changed the view that the kind could not be challenged. Locke provided valuable and important bridge between the middle ages and there of Revolution through today when we simply accept that people have their own ability to govern themselves and we no longer look to mythical all powerful beings floating in the ether to justify that desire.

And he said this in the late 1600's when it served a purpose.

For those with a handy calendar near - it is now 2016.
 
Master PO said:
william rea, wants rights talked about, and i repect his request that i don't talk about anything other then that, if you wish to talk in that subject of government ....create a thread, and i will join it.
Click to expand...

YOU brought it up in YOUR post and I am asking YOU about YOUR statement and its implications.

Is it your contention that the USA today in 2016 does NOT have a republican form of government?

Why are you running from your own statement like it was a leper bearing the plague?
 
William Rea said:
Feels like it sometimes I have to tell you.
Click to expand...

Only when we are here debating those who deny reality and substitute their own alternate fantasy and then expect the rest of us to share the delusion.
 
William Rea said:
It's ok, I understand why you are picking fights and squabbling on every side issue rather than stay with the topic. It's fine, just don't expect me to follow you off on your tangents.

When you want to get back on topic I'll respond.
Click to expand...

:2razz:...
 
haymarket said:
YOU brought it up in YOUR post and I am asking YOU about YOUR statement and its implications.

Is it your contention that the USA today in 2016 does NOT have a republican form of government?

Why are you running from your own statement like it was a leper bearing the plague?
Click to expand...

no guag bought up democracy, please learn to read former post
 
Master PO said:
do you reject reconized rights?, yes or no before i proceed
Click to expand...

Why are you unable to provide the verifiable proof of statement you already made without taking me and others down the rabbit hole with you?
 
Master PO said:
no guag bought up democracy, please learn to read former post
Click to expand...

I read YOUr post and YOUR statement and asked YOU about what YOU said.

Is it your contention that the USA today does NOT have a republican form of government?
 
Master PO said:
notice i didn't get a yes or no!
Click to expand...

You still have not answered a question from yesterday for heavens sake so forget about any new questions you want to ask in the last few minutes. That diversion WILL NOT WORK for you and WILL NOT SAVE YOU from your own statements and the demand to back up your own statements with verifiable evidence.

Why are you unable to provide the verifiable proof of statement you already made without taking me and others down the rabbit hole with you?
 
haymarket said:
I read YOUr post and YOUR statement and asked YOU about what YOU said.

Is it your contention that the USA today does NOT have a republican form of government?
Click to expand...

since william, does not no longer mind.

the u.s. was created as a republican form of government which was a mixed government, but in a little over 100 years the nation has moved to a more democratic form of government with the 17th amendment, and the government outside of the constitution promising the people things.

a mixed government is:

Mixed government is a form of government that incorporates elements of democracy, aristocracy, and monarchy. In a mixed government, the issues are decided variedly, for instance some issues are determined by the majority of the people, some other issues by few, and some other issues by a single person. The idea of mixed government is treated as an antecedent of separation of powers. It is also known as a mixed constitution.

Mixed Government Law & Legal Definition


federalist 40

On the Powers of the Convention to Form a Mixed Government Examined and Sustained

New York Packet
Friday, January 18, 1788
[James Madison]

To the People of the State of New York:

THE second point to be examined is, whether the convention were authorized to frame and propose this mixed Constitution.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom