Email address obfuscation in effect -- please
click here to turn it off.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
- To: "MLUG Off-Topic Discussion" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Subject: RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Re: What the hell is going on at theNewYorkTimes?
- From: "Spurling, Shannon" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:42:56 -0600
- Reply-to: MLUG Off-Topic Discussion <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Sender: EMAIL:PROTECTED
- Thread-index: AcTHUsH4Ep6n/UIVTB2n0sDxhzedmQADtJYw
- Thread-topic: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Re: What the hell is going on at theNewYorkTimes?
"> Where do such rights come from?
>From us. We make them up.
> They can't be logically deduced or proven.
They are "considered to be self-evident." Read the Declaration of
Independence for more on this."
Not completely correct....
" 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, --That
whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is
the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new
Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its
powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their
Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments
long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;
and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more
disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves
by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
Short answer, rights are endowed from the creator, recognized by man.
Then man creates the government to preserve these rights. The only
powers governments have are those abdicated by the governed.
Keep in mind that "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long
established should not be changed for light and transient causes".
Every one also knows "Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion," But do they remember the second part? "or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" That means that the president
could hold prayer meetings in the white house or hold church services
there if he so desired. It never says any thing to the effect of
separation of church and state. It says that the congress will not make
laws enforcing any religion on any one or keep them from practicing
their religion. That is simply what it says. So many people think it
says something else, but it doesn't.
Shannon Spurling
WAN Engineer -Specialist
MOREnet, Network Services, Core Network
3212 LeMone Industrial Blvd.
Columbia, MO 65201
Main:(573) 884-7200 Fax:(573)884-6673
EMAIL:PROTECTED
EMAIL:PROTECTED
-----Original Message-----
From: EMAIL:PROTECTED
[mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Miller
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 12:25 PM
To: MLUG Off-Topic Discussion
Subject: Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Re: What the hell is going on at the
NewYorkTimes?
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, Edward Terry wrote:
>> I'm sure Ryan didn't mean that. A law against murder is not just
based
>> on the immorality of murder, it is based on the right of the
individual
>> not to be murdered. We have the right to life, liberty and the
pursuit
>> of happiness, and to take away those rights must be illegal.
>
> Where do such rights come from?
>From us. We make them up.
> They can't be logically deduced or proven.
They are "considered to be self-evident." Read the Declaration of
Independence for more on this.
> We believe, based on emotion rather than logic, that people should
have
> these rights.
Not really. Logic and historical analysis tell us what life is like
with
and without basic human rights. We prefer freedom to slavery. Is that
a
purely emotional choice, not logical? Perhaps, but it that seems a bit
of
a stretch! Is it not logical to design a government that agrees with
human nature?
Am I the only one who thinks we shouldn't have to argue about the merits
of the rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness?
> We want the government to legislate morality by guaranteeing these
> rights.
What? You just lost me.
Mike
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion