- Joined
- Oct 22, 2012
- Messages
- 32,516
- Reaction score
- 5,321
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
you have posted nothing other than statements of faith from fellow believers - and that is worth less than the utilitarian value of one pound of garden manure.
My how times have changed.in original constitutional law, the u.s. federal government has no authority over the people....none!
in original constitutional law, the u.s. federal government has no authority over the people....none!
sorry i have posted law, legal definitions.....you and the others only posted you own personal words.
Logic should be everyone's vocabulary. Please stop hiding behind the Legalistic Falacy and come out in the sunlight.sorry i have posted law, legal definitions.....you and the others only posted you own personal words.
Interesting that all the discussion of the DOI fails to mention the "creator' that grants the inalienable rights. This is not 'natural' rights, this is a religious statement, and very contrary to the current use of 'natural rights' as somehow existing free of constructs such as religion and society.
That's what they got wrong, yes. Life and liberty certanly are alienable.UNALIENABLE rights
The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
logic should be everyone's vocabulary. Please stop hiding behind the legalistic falacy and come out in the sunlight.
That's what they got wrong, yes. Life and liberty certanly are alienable.
And in the 225 years we have been under the Constitution, what single decision of the US Supreme Court agrees with this opinion about the limits of the Constitution?
I dare you to come up with one single decision which says the absolute inane nonsense you just spewed here..... yet again.
The fact is that your opinion on this is so extreme... so fringe ... so far out there ... so far divorced from reality - that not one Court decision in 225 takes that position.
Not a one.
That tells you just what such delusions are the product of.
That's only part of the definition. You're describing Human Rights, not Natural Rights. Human Rights, that is rights inherent of the individual simply for being human, do certainly exist. But Natural Rights, by definition, are inalienable. All Human Rights are alienable so therefore no Human Right is a Natural Right.
My how times have changed.
Sorry, but yes. If the right to life were inalienable then there would be no murder. If the right to liberty were inalienable then prisons would be empty.sorry no!
bad mouthing the founders will get you nowhere!
I have, I even linked to it in this thread in support of my argument.Why don't you look up the definition of 'inalienable' for yourself? I have posted it several times now but it must be in invisible ink or something at least for a select few here..
Sorry, but yes. If the right to life were inalienable then there would be no murder. If the right to liberty were inalienable then prisons would be empty.
Actually TRUTH and FACTS get me everywhere.
emotional contention is not working for you.
Nothing in that post was emotional content. Your impotence to refute any of it speaks volumes. I ask again regarding your assertion that the federal government has no authority over the people: in the 225 years we have been under the Constitution, what single decision of the US Supreme Court agrees with this opinion about the limits of the Constitution?
I dare you to come up with one single decision which says the absolute inane nonsense you just spewed here..... yet again.
The fact is that your opinion on this is so extreme... so fringe ... so far out there ... so far divorced from reality - that not one Court decision in 225 takes that position.
Not a one.
That tells you just what such delusions are the product of.
in original constitutional law, the federal government has no authority over the people ...none!
If 1787 ever comes around again, you let us all know. Until there is such a breach in the space time continuum and that unlikely event happens - deal with reality EB. It makes rational thought so much easier.
I have, I even linked to it in this thread in support of my argument.
Think about what you just said.again the word in not INALIENABLE
UNALIENABLE means rights are not granted by man but by a higher power, which is out of the control of man.
government is to secure rights......it does not mean they can stop rights violations, it means government uses positive laws made by man to settle the violation.
Not in the slightest: http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/unalienable.htmThen you are contradicting yourself are you not?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?