• 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!

The rights of man and the duty of citizens

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,116
Reaction score
33,462
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Inaugural Address of President John F. Kennedy
Washington, D.C.
January 20, 1961

(Listen to this speech.)



The Left sure has changed 180 degrees. Quite astounding considering that Kennedy is probably thought to be one of the best Democrat presidents.
 

When JFK was done with his speech, did he provide any actual verifiable evidence for his two statements of belief
1- in God
2- that God gives us rights independent of any involvement or action by man?
 
When JFK was done with his speech, did he provide any actual verifiable evidence for his two statements of belief
1- in God
2- that God gives us rights independent of any involvement or action by man?

You are arguing with a duly elected official.
 
You are arguing with a duly elected official.

And a dead one. From your answer I take it the answer to both is a firm NO HE DID NOT PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE.
 

Has it changed or has the propaganda been fed long enough that some people have come to believe it.
 

I liked JFK...very much. He was a popular president with a hot wife.

I know of very few who think he was one of the best Democratic presidents, though.

FDR was a great Democratic president; Harry S Truman was a great Democratic president; LBJ was a damn good Democratic president.

JFK got some things done...and made us feel good about politics for a while.

And while I acknowledge he was a Democrat...he was far from a leftist...so your 180 turn comment was self-serving.
 
By the way...the ONLY rights we have are rights that people (human beings) have fought and died for. And they are FAR from inalienable. We can lose them tomorrow if we screw up.

Politicians of all stripes who talk about what the gods give us...are just serving up the pap many of us demand.
 

No one grants me the right to self-defense. I exercise that right of my own free will and to the best of my personal ability.

No one grants me the right of self-expression. I also exercise that right of my own free will and to the best of my ability.

I can be killed, and I can die naturally. Thus the right to life is not absolute.

I can be incarcerated, and I can be forcibly muzzled, but those types of actions only inhibit my freedoms to a certain extent. They do not abolish my free will.

It's like the right to rebel mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. In each case above you have the right to act, but it does not mean that you have a right to succeed.
 
No one grants me the right to self-defense. I exercise that right of my own free will and to the best of my personal ability.

IF you want to consider that a right, in the context of this discussion…you win.

You also have a right to have a nose and ears…using that reasoning. But if you want to participate meaningfully in the discussion in context…you probably should leave those things out.


No one grants me the right of self-expression. I also exercise that right of my own free will and to the best of my ability.

Go try to exercise your right to self-expression in Pyongyang…and then tell me about how you exercise it on your own. See how that works out.

I can be killed, and I can die naturally. Thus the right to life is not absolute.

IF you want to consider that a right, in the context of this discussion…you win.

You also have a right to have a nose and ears…using that reasoning. But if you want to participate meaningfully in the discussion in context…you probably should leave those things out.



I can be incarcerated, and I can be forcibly muzzled, but those types of actions only inhibit my freedoms to a certain extent. They do not abolish my free will.

Any rights you have, within the context of JFK’s remarks (and my response), are rights people have fought and died for…not rights granted by any gods.



It's like the right to rebel mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. In each case above you have the right to act, but it does not mean that you have a right to succeed.


Okay. I never spoke to the question of succeeding in various acts.
 

Do you really think its fair to take apart that OP with facts like you just did?
 
No one grants me the right to self-defense. I exercise that right of my own free will and to the best of my personal ability.

Actually there is a difference between your ability to defend yourself and a legal right to exercise self defense. The first is a mere physical ability of our species and most organisms as part of the instinct of self preservation. It has nothing at all to do with any rights one has as it is an ability.

The second is a recognition by the nation you live in and its legal system that there are certain situations and conditions under which the law will excuse you taking physical actions against another which would otherwise be viewed as a possible assault or attack but under a legal provision of self defense are accepted as legitimate.

The two are different and distinct.
 

LBJ was a racist POS.
 
Has it changed or has the propaganda been fed long enough that some people have come to believe it.

The Welfare State started before McGovern, but the pacifist character began with McGovern and continued on. Lots of it promoted for politics and power.
 

Nice work at cherry picking. Clearly you have no use for Kennedy's message in it's totality, just the part that you can understand.

Re-read, or listen to the address in it's entirety...if that is easier for you. You may then understand Kennedy's Democrat principles.
 
The Welfare State started before McGovern, but the pacifist character began with McGovern and continued on. Lots of it promoted for politics and power.

Never said otherwise, but the idea that Liberals do not understand service to their Nation or believe in God is pure hogwash (propaganda).
 
Never said otherwise, but the idea that Liberals do not understand service to their Nation or believe in God is pure hogwash (propaganda).

This is a political debate, don't forget that. Listen to Bernie Sanders, then get back to me.
 

I think it's you who needs to reread it. I'm sure it's quite alien to you.
 
I think it's you who needs to reread it. I'm sure it's quite alien to you.

Kennedy's Democrat principle alien to me...

You picked two lines out his address that fit your false narrative and left all his other Democrat principles out why? ...because they do not fit your narrative.

You just can't discount the body of Kennedy's address and pretend the few lines you cited are Kennedy's Democrat principles...that is ridiculous.

You may not agree with Kennedy's Democrat principles, and you may wish to ignore them...that does not mean he did not espouse them.
 
This is a political debate, don't forget that. Listen to Bernie Sanders, then get back to me.

I know what Bernie is and it is why I would never vote for him. His following is mainly among the young that seem to think the old Professor is some sort of genius, nothing could be further from the truth.
 

the democrat party made the swing to the left in the very early 1970's after kennedy which is why there is the contrast of the two
 
the democrat party made the swing to the left in the very early 1970's after kennedy which is why there is the contrast of the two

At first, though, Johnson and the Great Society should have been a warning that FDR policies were on their way to over reach in economic terms, the Democrats looked like they were going in the right direction with civil rights and all that. But out of the just cause has become a party of Neo-Liberal bigotry that is as you say diametrically opposed to the pre 1970 party policy.
 
This is a political debate

What kind of "debate" did you honestly expect to have by starting a thread just to say the left sucks?



It's just a trolling/baiting thread.
 
What kind of "debate" did you honestly expect to have by starting a thread just to say the left sucks?



It's just a trolling/baiting thread.

You could start by showing how current Democrat candidates are still in agreement with Kennedy and others of his era. If you can't/won't, then current Democrats are out of phase, as I said.
 
The Left sure has changed 180 degrees. Quite astounding considering that Kennedy is probably thought to be one of the best Democrat presidents.

Neither of those statements are in anyway contradictory to liberal ideas. It's republicans who seem to want free passes by dodging their tax burdens and robbing Americans of their basic human rights.
 
Neither of those statements are in anyway contradictory to liberal ideas. It's republicans who seem to want free passes by dodging their tax burdens and robbing Americans of their basic human rights.
Speaking of dodging tax burdens, who was Obama's first Sect Treasury?
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…