Whatever.

You just want to destroy me because I make you dig salt in my mine and keep you in chains. And for spouting off with a lot of fancy but meaningless words I'm cutting your rations in half, so now you really want to destroy me. Now get back to work.

So, you still haven't even told me what a leftist IS, how am I supposed to figure out whether I agree that I am one and if not then argue?

Moreover, I think our politics and our beliefs may be very similar, ****************** I think that the rhetoric that you expound is a blight. I can't stand someone that is ignorant yet thinks that they understand, and I can't stand someone that DARES to use his own religion, or his imperfect understanding, and I'm not saying my understanding if perfect nor will I ever, of God as a way to qualify his or her statements, to try and take moral supremacy and to try and win arguments that without the assuredness afforded by saying "these are God's arguments" would be poultry and pathetic arguments easily torn apart. When you say "I believe" it becomes a mere simulacrum of belief, because using your own faith or the invocation of divine decree with your argument is the gravest violence that can be done to those people that truly believe, and it is a weak cover-up for someone that can't win a debate outright. ********************

__________________
"...for the time being I gave up writing- there is already too much truth in the world- an overproduction which cannot be consumed!" ~Otto Rank

Fair enough. I take no qualm. You are right. I just wanted to show that to attribute Nazis to leftism was an amateur's mistake.

__________________
"...for the time being I gave up writing- there is already too much truth in the world- an overproduction which cannot be consumed!" ~Otto Rank

Geez - I was getting ramped up for a knock-down-drag-out . . .

:bows: :tips hat:

It seems to me this is just an argument about the definition of a human right, and not if they can exist or not with or without God. Is a human right something somebody has regardless of their ability to practice it? Or is a human right no longer a human right when it is "taken away"? It's a simple disagreement on scematics. Simply by definition, I believe human rights belong to all humans, even if their ability to practice it has been taken away.

That being said, it's a completely different argument if human rights exist at all. I'm still debating this in my own mind, but currently my position is that they can't, even with god. If a right doens't exist unless god says it exists, I don't think that's a "human right" at all. It's a "god given right" that exists independant of the nature of humans.

Thus I see Publius Infinitum's argument that human rights can't exist without God, and raise him the fact that they can't exist even with God.

So if god can't give a human right, what about nature? No offence to Kant, but I don't see how human rights can be derived from human nature. Unless someone can give some fantastic argument as for why being "sentient" somehow establishes rights, we are nothing more than animals who have no rights in nature. Just survival of the fittest.

All I believe in is civil rights created where we establish a social contract "under the veil of ignorance". This is done with a mutual understanding that we will all flourish togeather better than under nature's laws. The problem with this is we do not always function "under the veil of ignorance". Your slave owner ignores the fact that one of the slaves "could have been him" and instead benefits from the fact that it's not him.

Well, I wasn't trying to attack conservativism so much as show that the Nazis were conservative. By all means, I don't have too great a love for liberalism either. I didn't mean to attack conservativism at large, I guess I was just so geared up from being infuriated with Publius that everything that left my figurative mouth was angry and reviling in tone. I have no problem admitting that you are right. I'll even apologize.

__________________
"...for the time being I gave up writing- there is already too much truth in the world- an overproduction which cannot be consumed!" ~Otto Rank

And thus you essentially end up in the place I've described, that rights are a useful concept that allows men to live together in peace and to their mutual benefit, that helps us build The Good Society where all men have an opportunity to flourish and build The Good Life for themselves, and that this is true because it fits well with man's nature. They are a concept - not a thing. They have meaning only in the context of a particular thing, which is humans living in society.

Says who? And again, which one? To answer like this is a cop-out.

Where are these rights codified?

If human rights are eternal, then the implication is that they are also unchanging. And yet, our perspective on human rights has in fact changed a great deal. Thus, these rights are not eternal, but rather, based upon changing human perceptions.

But wait. Why didn't they have rights in this society a hundred years ago?
Then why were humans allowed to enslave other humans?

.

To whom? I've never made that mistake.
Where were these rights codified by your God?

I'm saying that human rights have always existed outside of God and the basis for these rights is human societies, not an imaginary deity.

__________________
Job 13:5 (New International Version)
If only you would be altogether silent! For you, that would be wisdom.

"The Conservative Ideology" ROFLMNAO... Nazism is a function of the ideological left... what it sought to conserve, as is the case in every leftist culture, was power; power conserved through the perpetuation of the default leftist myth of the greater collective good...

The Nazis were leftists to the core... You're either intentionally using relative terms out of context; making you a nefarious sophist; or your ignorant of the fact that 'conservativism' is not an ideology; it is a relative line of reasoning... In China Communists are conservatives... In the US, Conservatives are Americans.... those that seek to conserve the principles on which the US was founded; individual freedom, set upon the bed rock principles of divine human rights...


Who suggested otherwise sis? I merely provided them in example, in response to the assertion that the Opening Premise was unlikely.

Gee... how enlightened of you to recognize the stark distinctions in genocide. It should however be noted that all genocides share stark commonalities... it's good however that you realized that the OP spoke to genocide and that such is fairly common... almost a given where leftist find power.


Well that's mighty white of ya... given that the ideological left is the most lethal culture in human history; with no close second.




In some parts of the world Socialism IS conservative.... all conservatism is, sport... for the third time is a species of reasoning which seeks to conserve something. In the 1920s- 30s Germany, Conservatives wanted to conserve GERMANY, its history and cultural pride. The Nazis came to power on the farce that is the 3rd way... the middle way... they were faced with embracing reason on the right or the cutlural abyss ofo socialism on the left... they chose the middle ground offered by the Nazis; which were the ideological equivilent of the US Progressives. Which if given power will inevitably come to the same result.

Those that seek a 3rd way do so because they're incapable of facing the responsibilities inherent in the principles of nature and the immutable consequences of same... of course, nature doesn't change because the weak can't come to grips with reality.

Progressives, centrists and moderates serve only to enable the ideological left... Leftism is a virulent, corrosive ideology that must destroy what ever culture is sufficiently foolish to lend it power... It is the ideology by which evil finds its political voice.

I believe I have sis... Lefism the vessel on which evil sets its ideologicla sail... it is that which fosters whuman weakness... the tattered remnants of Marx and the endless litanny of factions spun from it; proressives, Moderates, Centrists... 3rd way and middlers. The proponents of the needs of the collective over the inalienable rights inherent in the individual.

That's not uncommon... my beliefs are what every American believes...

<<<Quote removed for thread continuity>>>

Ahh... so you're a Moderate? Or do you prefer 'Centrist?'

Ahhh a progressive... ROFL...

Sweet rationalization...

[quote]When you say "I believe" it becomes a mere simulacrum of belief, because using your own faith or the invocation of divine decree with your argument is the gravest violence that can be done to those people that truly believe, and it is a weak cover-up for someone that can't win a debate outright. <<<Removed for thread continuity.

ROFLMNAO... Moderates...