• 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!

Declaration of Independence is Law, it is U.S. Code[W:118]

Status
Not open for further replies.
haymarket said:
NO. You are doing much much much more. You re trying to make this something it is not. Yes, Congress had the Declaration printed in the 1870's. No it is not the law and mandates nothing of anyone.
Click to expand...

already it has been stated by me, the DOI has no force of law.
 
American said:
Show me where all your rights are listed.
Click to expand...


I did not say that our rights are completely listed in the Constitution or anywhere.

There isnt any proof that a creator exists thus there isnt any proof that inalienable rights exist that were given by a creator. We then need to turn to other means to figure out our inalienable rights. A court cannot just ask some make believe creator what exactly these rights are. The bible would be a invalid place too look since the proposition of a creator is vague and not specific at all. We could even interpret creator as meaning natural events.

But still the point that the Declaration was making is that we are all born equal, and all of our rights are the same. No one can take those rights away. We dont need to site gods to claim to have inalienable rights.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
I did not say that our rights are completely listed in the Constitution or anywhere.

There isnt any proof that a creator exists thus there isnt any proof that inalienable rights exist that were given by a creator. We then need to turn to other means to figure out our inalienable rights. A court cannot just ask some make believe creator what exactly these rights are. The bible would be a invalid place too look since the proposition of a creator is vague and not specific at all. We could even interpret creator as meaning natural events.

But still the point that the Declaration was making is that we are all born equal, and all of our rights are the same. No one can take those rights away. We dont need to site gods to claim to have inalienable rights.
Click to expand...

the founders did not say God, but the "creator" to be subjective to the reader, the meaning was to convey that rights are not man made.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
I did not say that our rights are completely listed in the Constitution or anywhere.

There isnt any proof that a creator exists thus there isnt any proof that inalienable rights exist that were given by a creator. We then need to turn to other means to figure out our inalienable rights. A court cannot just ask some make believe creator what exactly these rights are. The bible would be a invalid place too look since the proposition of a creator is vague and not specific at all. We could even interpret creator as meaning natural events.

But still the point that the Declaration was making is that we are all born equal, and all of our rights are the same. No one can take those rights away. We dont need to site gods to claim to have inalienable rights.
Click to expand...

Agree....

We know humans have evolved with "survival skills" along with "common sense", problem solving, coping and social skills, which might explain how we've developed an innate ability to recognize various behaviors that we employ in social arenas that has taught us values/moral reasoning such as: It's not good to unjustly kill our fellow citizens, live and let live as long as we're not infringing on our fellow citizens, or the properties we acquire through our labor or the labor of those who pass their property to those they leave behind - shouldn't be unjustly taken from us. And that our leaders shouldn't be able to do any of the aforementioned at their will.

Evolution has proven to be handy.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
The sermon usually srta out with Deuteronomy 8:1- 10 They insist that America a child of providence. And goes on from there. Though often there are others that they start off with.
Click to expand...

Wow...

Oh, man. That scripture pretty covers the bases, huh? That sums up the ideology. Guess humans are just robotic simpletons. No minds of our own. Just follow the directions in the book and don't ask questions.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
For ****s sake I never made that strawman argument. I asserted that humans with rational minds can recognize what rights they should have and what rights they demand.
Click to expand...

recognize...hmmmm. maybe you are learning...thats a good sign.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
In reality then I deflected your deflection.
Click to expand...

sorry no


i made a statement....which you deflected by simply posting........ffs

when i called it a deflection, you acted surprised as it you have given a good rebuttal and wanted to know hows its defalcation.

again i stated to you...ffs........ was a deflection by you

you tried to save face....by stating the quote above was a deflection.....very sad.:(
 
ernst barkmann said:
i would not be quoting any law, only that the volume was made to be made "legal evidence of law"....however it was change to evidence of law.

see post with link #1081
Click to expand...

of course you won't quote the law. If you did, you'd prove that the law said nothing about any "volume"
 
sangha said:
of course you won't quote the law. If you did, you'd prove that the law said nothing about any "volume"
Click to expand...

excuse me.... what law is there to quote...by saying printed edition/volume......please tell me?

ernst barkmann said:
printed volume!

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=018/llsl018.db&recNum=3


another bit of info

https://books.google.com/books?id=1...independence made prima facie in 1878&f=false

http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/sal/sal.htm
Click to expand...

under the seal of the Secretary of State and when printed and promulgated as herein provided the printed volume shall be legal evidence of laws therein contained, in all the courts of the united states, and other the several States and Territories

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=018/llsl018.db&recNum=3
 
Last edited:
Removable Mind said:
Agree....

We know humans have evolved with "survival skills" along with "common sense", problem solving, coping and social skills, which might explain how we've developed an innate ability to recognize various behaviors that we employ in social arenas that has taught us values/moral reasoning such as: It's not good to unjustly kill our fellow citizens, live and let live as long as we're not infringing on our fellow citizens, or the properties we acquire through our labor or the labor of those who pass their property to those they leave behind - shouldn't be unjustly taken from us. And that our leaders shouldn't be able to do any of the aforementioned at their will.

Evolution has proven to be handy.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Its be no coincidence that every society in modern history has the same code of ethics. They may vary a little but the overall effect is the same. Considering the vast cultural and religious differences the is evident (even now) there is a glue (so to speak) that is holding as all together. Morality and Evolutionary Biology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

My problem with laying all off our rights on a creator sets up with the possibility of losing those rights. If religious thought changes over time certain rights change with them. of course the same could be said about social change. Which is why I dont agree with the notion that all of our rights cannot be written down. We have very large hard drives these days and plenty of people capable of compiling a non-exhaustive list of rights. I do understand the rational behind not listing all our rights in the Constitution. And I agree thats not the place it should be. But courts of laws deal with rights everyday. It would be interesting to see a compiled list of known rights. SO far in the courts there have been rulings on rights. I wonder what the simplified list looks like?
 
ernst barkmann said:
sorry no


i made a statement....which you deflected by simply posting........ffs

when i called it a deflection, you acted surprised as it you have given a good rebuttal and wanted to know hows its defalcation.

again i stated to you...ffs........ was a deflection by you

you tried to save face....by stating the quote above was a deflection.....very sad.:(
Click to expand...

You dont feel deflected? Because I do?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom