Leftist parrot says that rights come from government and only Christian nationalists believe rights come from God

[Aristides]

3 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

According to you have no right to defend your rights since humans give them to you and can take them away. You only have the rights humans give you. To think you could defend your rights yourself is to suggest you have rights not given to you by humans. It's amazing how blind you are to your own biological argument. 

Nonsense, I say exactly the opposite. You have no rights other than what you can defend.

[Yakuda]

7 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Nonsense, I say exactly the opposite. You have no rights other than what you can defend.

You think you do but you really dont. Where do you get the right to defend against  your rights being taken away from you from the people you say have the authority to grant them to you? 

[Aristides]

23 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

You think you do but you really dont. Where do you get the right to defend against  your rights being taken away from you from the people you say have the authority to grant them to you? 

Who said anything about authority? You have no guarantee of any rights.

[Yakuda]

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

Who said anything about authority? You have no guarantee of any rights.

How do humans grant rights then if they have no authority to do so? So if you have no guarantee of any right then you have no right to defend your rights being taken away from you. 

[Aristides]

5 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

How do humans grant rights then if they have no authority to do so? So if you have no guarantee of any right then you have no right to defend your rights being taken away from you. 

Rights are something humans agree to give each other and make them into law. They are a human invention. All of them have conditions.

[Yakuda]

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

Rights are something humans agree to give each other and make them into law. They are a human invention. All of them have conditions.

Who invented the rights? How were the rights identified and how was it decided which rights would be granted? Id love to hear about the origins of this process. 

[Aristides]

38 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

Who invented the rights? How were the rights identified and how was it decided which rights would be granted? Id love to hear about the origins of this process. 

Humans over a period of centuries, we are still trying to define what should be rights and what shouldn't. They didn't magically appear out of the ether.

Edited April 24, 2024 by Aristides

[Yakuda]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Humans over a period of centuries, we are still trying to define what should be rights and what shouldn't. They didn't magically appear out of the ether.

None of that answers my questions. 

[Aristides]

34 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

None of that answers my questions. 

Your questions make no sense. You present no arguments that any rights are inherent or granted by any god.

[Yakuda]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Your questions make no sense. You present no arguments that any rights are inherent or granted by any god.

Translated: "I have no answers."

I sure have and so have you and you don't even realize it. 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Yakuda said:

I sure have...

Arguments are not the same as evidence.

There's at least a .01% chance you're right but I doubt an argument alone will clinch it.

 

[Yakuda]

Just now, eyeball said:

Arguments are not the same as evidence.

There's at least a .01% chance you're right but I doubt an argument alone will clinch it.

 

Lets see your work on the math or is this just another thing we're supposed to believe because you said so. 

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

Lets see your work on the math or is this just another thing we're supposed to believe because you said so. 

Because Schrodinger said so.

 

[Yakuda]

33 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Because Schrodinger said so.

 

Work it out 

[eyeball]

15 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

Work it out 

You can see ii in practice right in this forum all the time - you can make your position precisely known to your own heart's content but don't expect anyone to ever agree with it.

It's not rocket science, it's political science.

[Yakuda]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You can see ii in practice right in this forum all the time - you can make your position precisely known to your own heart's content but don't expect anyone to ever agree with it.

It's not rocket science, it's political science.

It's not climate "science" either it climate BS and the "scientific method" is a load of horse s**t on too of it. 

Just now, Yakuda said:

It's not climate "science" either its climate BS and the "scientific method" is a load of horse s**t on too of it. 

 

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, Yakuda said:

...the "scientific method" is a load of horse s**t

There's certainly no mistaking your position is there? Apparently Schrodinger might have been wrong.

 

[Yakuda]

18 hours ago, eyeball said:

There's certainly no mistaking your position is there? Apparently Schrodinger might have been wrong.

 

What I'm saying is climate "science" says it's a closed case and claiming otherwise relegates the claimant to the status of insignificant. That means the scientific method is horse s**t. I didn't make the statement.

[Legato]

19 hours ago, eyeball said:

There's certainly no mistaking your position is there? Apparently Schrodinger might have been wrong.

 

Schrodinger's cat was actually a boson doing the tango with a fermion. An infinite number of outcomes no matter what key the music was played in.