Six Iranians arrested for dancing to promote islam

bigarrow said:
You poor boys are in denial. Not a one of you can hang with stu in a debate. Tao always says he likes a detailed ongoing discussion with those with opposing views, that is until stu worked him over. Jem you have a pass since you're a religious nut it's understood that you will be blind to all views except your own. And as usuall 666 is a clown. Good job stu.
More...

Hey, look everyone! The overweight roofer had his internet service turned back on! Welcome back, Peter! I'm not sure you're qualified to mention "school" of any sort.

peter-griffin.png
 
Tsing Tao said:
Hey, look everyone! The overweight roofer had his internet service turned back on! Welcome back, Peter! I'm not sure you're qualified to mention "school" of any sort.

peter-griffin.png
More...

My dad was a roofer.... shows what kind of stock I come from!

:D
 
Trader666 said:
"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."
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
More...

Funny how that's all you can see, when they wrote down in their own hand nature's god :p
 
Hoofhearted said:
BTW, Stu, when they inserted the word "Creator" into the text, I seriously doubt they were talking about your mama's cootchie.
More...

Hey, maybe they were! When they didn't insert the word "God" but did insert the words "their creator" into the text instead , you have to seriously doubt they were talking about the G word.

Hoofhearted said:
Actually, inalienable rights can be God given, and can also be taken away by God. I think what the old boys were referring to was rights that couldn't be taken by other men.
More...

No, really they can't. Not by any rational argument.

Inalienable rights are supposed to be universal, unchanging, self-evident, not subject to forfeiture, not transferable.
God changes all the time. Even the catholic god's rights don't even match the protestant god's rights, nor the muslims god's rights, and they alter throughout history.

If they could be god-given then someone else's god could also give them, rather than yours!

Hoofhearted said:
I'd like to try to answer this one for you too. It seems to me the founders did believe in God, that is to say they believed in a higher being that is responsible for not only their existence, but also their moral integrity.

That is why they first say "Natural Law", then follow up with "Nature's God". They are saying there are rights given to men by the laws of nature, but there are also rights given to men from God (who created nature), and these rights are not to be taken away by man.

So if they were to elaborate I think they might say that Man has natural needs- food, water, air, shelter, etc.
But that Man also has spiritual needs- to serve their God and seek to have a relationship with God in the hopes that they may attain the entire fulfillment God wants for them.

The founders also believed that they should not give a certain name for God, as one of the key principles for the foundation of America was freedom of religious beliefs. They, like you Stu, understood that each and every one of us may have a different idea of What or Who God is.

As they didn't want to Alienate the masses from the Declaration, they chose to use the term "their Creator" instead of God, Jehovah, Jesus, Baal, etc.
More...

That's fair comment and there must be a lot of truth to it. However where I disagree is to do with a point Jem raised, albeit through one of his his usual ignorant mistaken self-defeating posts.

Using just the word "Creator" the way you do mis-allocates meaning. It is not even in terms the Declaration uses and certainly not wording the founders wrote down. Using proper nouns where common nouns were made, matters in writing. It is the way meaning is conveyed. Making a difference between "Creator"/your God , and "their creator"/the founders god, and "their creator"/as nature, and no god at all.

"their creator" arrests the religious wrapped up in ideology from assuming a privilege of ownership they often consider themselves entitled to, when assuming everyone else is obliged to accept their insane beliefs.

But you are absolutely right. The founders keen for freedom, with Jefferson seeing himself as ... a warm zealot for the attainment of liberty... did not give certain name to God. Not to alienate, but inclusive, right up to not God.

Hoofhearted said:
Where I believe they, and so many others have misunderstood is: What exactly are our rights?

Let's face it, we don't have the right to anything but to die, and not one of us even has full control of our fate.

Perhaps we have the right to seek our God's wisdom, comfort etc while we are here, but this is a far cry from Life and Liberty. On the most important day of Jesus' life, he received Imprisonment and Death.

Can you imagine how many people would have turned their cheeks and ran if they heard something like "Man also has the right to imprisonment and death, if that's what God wants for you." ?
More...

Again you make the point.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident...". The point being these truths had to be identified by man. Not by any God. The right to hold true, certain values, even when any God is being evil or just wrong.

Will you now wander toward the clown pool the way Tsing Tao seems to have?
 
stu said:
All I have mentioned is they firstly didn't write the word "God" anywhere. Which is true.
More...

Keep digging, troll :D

"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."
www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
 
stu said:
When they didn't insert the word "God" but did insert the words "their creator" into the text instead , you have to seriously doubt they were talking about the G word.
More...
Except they did insert the word "God" and in the very first sentence. And the word "Creator" in the sentence right after that. But keep up your hilarious compulsive lying and denial :D


"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."
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
 
so according to Stu when the founders wrote "Natures' God" they did not write the word God.

the lengths a troll will go to deny that some of the founders were believers.
stu exhibits some sort rabid atheists split with reality on the subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top