PDA

View Full Version : The Right to persue happiness


Tyburn
01-14-2014, 07:32 PM
Who believes that the ability to persue happiness should be a Human Right?

:huh:

County Mike
01-14-2014, 07:54 PM
It is.

Neezar
01-14-2014, 08:44 PM
Depends on what makes you happy, I guess. Punching certain people in the throat would make me happy. But some people think that I have no right to do that.

MattHughesRocks
01-15-2014, 04:31 AM
Sounds selfish as hell to me!

:rolleyes:

County Mike
01-15-2014, 02:29 PM
Depends on what makes you happy, I guess. Punching certain people in the throat would make me happy. But some people think that I have no right to do that.

If it makes you happy, then I believe you have the right to do it.

Carry on!

Tyburn
01-15-2014, 05:36 PM
It is.

According to the American Declaration of Independance...its listed as the Fourth inalienable right of any Individual...following Equality (intrinsic value, NOT Status) Life, and Freedom.

Firstly, I think that "Human Rights" are nothing but a sociological fabrication by a civilization to define its moral and ethic values. Essential, but just a compiled list of qualities none-the-less.

The reason I believe that, is not because various different lists differ. For example, there is nothing outside the American Culture that states one should be entitled to have fire-arms, and nothing in the American Culture that says free at the point of sale Health Care for all is a right.

I believe in God, and believe that the only "intrinsic" or "inalienable" rights, so to speak come from Him. Believing, as I do, that he is "Rex Celestis" and Judge of all. I find that he is an Absolute Monarchy. Therefore, we have no rights, except those given to us by him. I See very few specific rights outlined in Scripture. However, I would say that we can take as absolute any promise he has made, but those promises are instigated by his Command, not given us as due, or owed. I simply believe that the nature of Holiness denies him the ability to re-tract his word, like it WOULD do with a Human Monarch...Especially one who governs under any form of common law, as opposed to any fixed constitutional law.

Now the problem with the persuit of happiness, is that its not the same for everyone, and may not be ethically sound...infact, it could be directly incompatable and therefore lead to a paradox (one person seeks happiness through silence...his next door neighbour needs loud music to be Happy....who has the "right" to prevail in this situation?) its as open to interpretation as it is abuse.

Infact, it bears a lot with both Hedonism, and Nietzscheian Philosophy. Fredrich, an Enlightenment Philosopher of sorts, and a serious iconoclast, has some very dangerous philosophies. One is known as "The Becoming"

In Fredrichs view, every individual is supposed to want and lean towards displaying their full potential. That is different for different people, and he says that all should persue that to the point where it doesnt impact negatively on anyone else. He says that those who push the boundaries, eventually reach their potential, and become, Super-Men...Men whose full potential has been reached. Thats German for "Ubermensche" and we all know what happened when Adolf Hitler came across Nietzsche and decided to try and put some of his ideologies into practise.

Some of Nietzsche is absolutely right, his Will to Power...Power Discourse Philosophy is absolutely spot on...and Adolf made good use of that aswell...as will any great Orator, who is able to encorperate little illusions to heighten their message. For example, any Great Speech, begins with a moments silence. Most orators dare do nothing more then a brief ten seconds during which they mess with the microphone, or shuffle their papers....But Adolf, would rise, walk to the podium...and stop...often for two or three whole mins...but I digress...

I certainly do not think that the seeking of happiness is something to be demanded as a right. just like I dont believe that Utilitarianism as an ethical system is a brilliant one to follow (Utilitarianism states that what makes the majority the most happy should always be the thing to do)

rearnakedchoke
01-15-2014, 06:20 PM
you are right in the sense that human rights are a government created issue .. because, where ever you go in the world, they are different ...

Tyburn
01-15-2014, 06:25 PM
you are right in the sense that human rights are a government created issue .. because, where ever you go in the world, they are different ...

I believe so...I also believe its not possible to guarentee things.

If, for example, you truely believed that "Life" was an inalienable right...explain those Africans who are born into unsustainable environments, through no fault of their parents.

If Life was always a right...noone would ever be able to die....because an "inalienable right" isnt supposed to be a created thing by man...but a fact from God.

So far, the only "right" I have really discerned is "intrinsic value" which is closest to "all men are born equal" I would say "All men are of intrinsic worth because they were made by God, and made in His Image"

but how much that worth is...and whether some are worth more then others, I can not say...except to say "you are worth more then many sparrows"

:laugh:

rearnakedchoke
01-15-2014, 06:54 PM
I believe so...I also believe its not possible to guarentee things.

If, for example, you truely believed that "Life" was an inalienable right...explain those Africans who are born into unsustainable environments, through no fault of their parents.

If Life was always a right...noone would ever be able to die....because an "inalienable right" isnt supposed to be a created thing by man...but a fact from God.

So far, the only "right" I have really discerned is "intrinsic value" which is closest to "all men are born equal" I would say "All men are of intrinsic worth because they were made by God, and made in His Image"

but how much that worth is...and whether some are worth more then others, I can not say...except to say "you are worth more then many sparrows"

:laugh:

i agree with you, and maybe i am reading into this, but it seems are a disagreeing/bashing with the US Constitution ... if not, that is fine .. as i said earlier, every country is going to be different ... some people may like the idea of the US having the right to bear arms .. and may want to move there because of it .. some people may like the fact that in canada you can't be discriminated against based on your sexual orientation .. and move here ... again, not trying to stir the pot as i usually do, but just trying to see where you are getting at ..

flo
01-15-2014, 07:20 PM
Is anyone else reading this as "the right to peruse happiness"? I see it that way every time I look at the thread title.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

County Mike
01-15-2014, 08:11 PM
Try not to think of it as a "Right to own firearms". Think of it more like "The right to own any means of defense that could currently be available to those trying to harm you."

If there's a chance of someone hitting you with a rock, then you have a right to also own rocks for your protection. You have the right to defend yourself against an attacker so you should automatically have a right to own the same weapons your attacker may own.

Tyburn
01-16-2014, 07:49 PM
Try not to think of it as a "Right to own firearms". Think of it more like "The right to own any means of defense that could currently be available to those trying to harm you."


Now that does make more sense to me :)

that is NOT a right that our Government offers us. There is restrictions on what we can use to defend ourselves...even with aparatus that really can only be used in self defence.

We can use whatevers to hand...but we must make sure that we do not in any way "hurt" or "injure" or "damage" our attacker....because the Government claims they have, basically, equal rights when it comes to attack and defence :sad:

NateR
01-29-2014, 12:43 AM
Is anyone else reading this as "the right to peruse happiness"? I see it that way every time I look at the thread title.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Yeah, it's a bit ironic that an Englishman would have such a poor grasp of the English language. :laugh:

Dave, you should probably go pursue a dictionary before you worry about pursuing anything else. :tongue0011:

Anyways, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are rights that every human being has been granted by GOD, not government. Since these are GOD-given rights, then no government or human leader has the authority to violate them.

Of course, other countries have different definitions of human rights, but that's only because all of those other countries are wrong. Duh. :rolleyes:

rearnakedchoke
01-29-2014, 01:57 PM
Yeah, it's a bit ironic that an Englishman would have such a poor grasp of the English language. :laugh:

Dave, you should probably go pursue a dictionary before you worry about pursuing anything else. :tongue0011:

Anyways, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are rights that every human being has been granted by GOD, not government. Since these are GOD-given rights, then no government or human leader has the authority to violate them.

Of course, other countries have different definitions of human rights, but that's only because all of those other countries are wrong. Duh. :rolleyes:

how do we know these are God-given rights?? they are rights given by man to citizens of the USA

NateR
01-29-2014, 03:08 PM
how do we know these are God-given rights?? they are rights given by man to citizens of the USA

Absolutely not. The Founding Fathers believed that these basic human rights were GOD-given and they believed that assertion was supported by the Bible (maybe not in specific verses, but in overall themes present in the Scriptures). It's the entire basis behind the formation of the United States.

How can a person's right to life be something that a government grants to them? That's idiocy. The government can't grant life to anyone.

Did the Canadian government have anything to do with you being born? Is there some kind of official document that a Canadian governing official signed off on allowing you to exist?

If you truly believe that your life is a gift given to you by the country of Canada, then you would also have to accept the fact that your government could take that life from you at any time. What if they came today and said, "Hey, it's no longer convenient for us to allow you to live, so we need to put you to death for the greater good of Canada"? Would you gladly go along with that? If you truly believe that your right to life comes from the government, then you would have to.

rearnakedchoke
01-29-2014, 04:17 PM
Absolutely not. The Founding Fathers believed that these basic human rights were GOD-given and they believed that assertion was supported by the Bible (maybe not in specific verses, but in overall themes present in the Scriptures). It's the entire basis behind the formation of the United States.

How can a person's right to life be something that a government grants to them? That's idiocy. The government can't grant life to anyone.

Did the Canadian government have anything to do with you being born? Is there some kind of official document that a Canadian governing official signed off on allowing you to exist?

If you truly believe that your life is a gift given to you by the country of Canada, then you would also have to accept the fact that your government could take that life from you at any time. What if they came today and said, "Hey, it's no longer convenient for us to allow you to live, so we need to put you to death for the greater good of Canada"? Would you gladly go along with that? If you truly believe that your right to life comes from the government, then you would have to.

ok, sure ... you got me with the life part .. but liberty and pursuit of happiness can be taken away from you depending on your gov't ... so in your last paragraph, talking about gov't giving and taking away, it does apply ... people throw the term "god-given" right out there for a lot of things ... i just don't see how they get that ...

NateR
01-30-2014, 12:37 AM
ok, sure ... you got me with the life part .. but liberty and pursuit of happiness can be taken away from you depending on your gov't ... so in your last paragraph, talking about gov't giving and taking away, it does apply ... people throw the term "god-given" right out there for a lot of things ... i just don't see how they get that ...

Tyrannical governments can take them away, yes. That's kind of the whole point. Any government that attempts to infringe upon the GOD-given human rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a tyranny.

rearnakedchoke
01-30-2014, 01:19 PM
Tyrannical governments can take them away, yes. That's kind of the whole point. Any government that attempts to infringe upon the GOD-given human rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a tyranny.

yeah, but how do you put trust in them to come up with this "message" from God when they were even practicing what they were preaching ... slavery wasn't abolished until mid 1800's and some of the founding fathers had slaves themselves? so its hard to say they actually believed people had the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness ...

Tyburn
01-30-2014, 07:18 PM
how do we know these are God-given rights?? they are rights given by man to citizens of the USA

Exactly :laugh:

So if anyone has the right to happiness...I guess its fine for anyone to do anything they want, at the expense of anyone else...and claim its GOD-Given.

A Company CEO is made happy by maximum profit...and so pays his workers as little as possible...I suppose thats fine?

A Sadist enjoys harming his Wife for fun...I suppose thats fine?

A King expects Loyalty from his Subjects....Well...That was fine until the 1770s :laugh:

The Truth is...if its not in the Bible, it may not be "GOD Given" and the Bible tells us that we have naught but through Grace...and that GOD is a King...you follow Him...or you suffer eternal death.

The US Constitution, and the DOI are not Scripture, therefore they are fallable...and to say anyone should be able to go after whatever makes them happy, and put no limits on that, leaves the possibility open for Philosophers like Fredrich Nietzsche and those who enjoy some of his more dangerous philosophies like Adolf Hitler for example.

Tyburn
01-30-2014, 07:21 PM
yeah, but how do you put trust in them to come up with this "message" from God when they were even practicing what they were preaching ... slavery wasn't abolished until mid 1800's and some of the founding fathers had slaves themselves? so its hard to say they actually believed people had the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness ...

Its worse then that.

All men might be born free...but did those European-American Settlers actually believe that those who were enslaved were anything but animals...and the constitution does not say that these GOD given rights are present for animals...infact, biblically speaking, animals are put on earth to serve man, and for man to take possession of.

This is why Pragmatics matter with the US Constitution....the Words are missleading from a Religious, and Ethnic point of view.

rearnakedchoke
01-30-2014, 07:43 PM
great .. i got dave agreeing with me .. now i'm screwed!!!!!!!



haha .. kidding

NateR
01-30-2014, 10:24 PM
Exactly :laugh:

So if anyone has the right to happiness...I guess its fine for anyone to do anything they want, at the expense of anyone else...and claim its GOD-Given.

A Company CEO is made happy by maximum profit...and so pays his workers as little as possible...I suppose thats fine?

A Sadist enjoys harming his Wife for fun...I suppose thats fine?

A King expects Loyalty from his Subjects....Well...That was fine until the 1770s :laugh:

The Truth is...if its not in the Bible, it may not be "GOD Given" and the Bible tells us that we have naught but through Grace...and that GOD is a King...you follow Him...or you suffer eternal death.

The US Constitution, and the DOI are not Scripture, therefore they are fallable...and to say anyone should be able to go after whatever makes them happy, and put no limits on that, leaves the possibility open for Philosophers like Fredrich Nietzsche and those who enjoy some of his more dangerous philosophies like Adolf Hitler for example.

You asked the question, I gave you the answer. So you disagree? Of course you do. You're British! :laugh:

Its worse then that.

All men might be born free...but did those European-American Settlers actually believe that those who were enslaved were anything but animals...and the constitution does not say that these GOD given rights are present for animals...infact, biblically speaking, animals are put on earth to serve man, and for man to take possession of.

This is why Pragmatics matter with the US Constitution....the Words are missleading from a Religious, and Ethnic point of view.

Not true at all. The idea that Africans were subhumans and little more than animals is a result of Darwin's theories. Prior to that, slavery was purely an economic necessity going all the way back to Biblical times.

Also, the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776 and the first serious effort to ban slavery in America started in 1777. So, these men were completely aware of the disparity between American idealism and the reality.

Just because someone is a poor representative of an idea, doesn't make the idea false. If that were the case then you would just have to look at one Christian to be able to discredit all of Christianity.

Tyburn
01-31-2014, 07:48 PM
1) You asked the question, I gave you the answer. So you disagree? Of course you do. You're British! :laugh:



2) Not true at all. The idea that Africans were subhumans and little more than animals is a result of Darwin's theories. Prior to that, slavery was purely an economic necessity going all the way back to Biblical times.

Also, the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776 and the first serious effort to ban slavery in America started in 1777. So, these men were completely aware of the disparity between American idealism and the reality.

3) Just because someone is a poor representative of an idea, doesn't make the idea false. If that were the case then you would just have to look at one Christian to be able to discredit all of Christianity.

1) Well thats just racist :mellow:

:laugh:

2) Erm...news for you, Nathan...I think you find the British Slave Trade was slightly older then the American version, and that those traits which carried over into the American Slave Trade were nothing but a copy of their British counterparts. Now the British certainly believed that Africans were sub-human, and whilst it ended up being a skin colour issue...it didnt begin that way, because the British system, was, and later returned to, its Roman Heratage, which indescriminate of skin tone, considered largely everything outside of itself Barbarous, and therefore not civilized, and therefore, not proper humans. Most of North Europe, Africa, and the Orient, fell under this description...infact, what a horrible suprise it must have been when the Visigoths actually besieged Rome at one point.

So the ideal of slavery had nothing to do with Darwin, and the use of Slaves for anything other then private ownership was something invented by the British to run the Empire...and the American South was based on that system..So I beg to differ that Darwin had anything to do with it. This was well before Enlightenment Philosophies...and if you bother to note what a good proportion of the American Civil War was really all about, you will find that those in the south, whilst fully in compliance with the Constitution and DOI would not extend such privalage to slaves...I'm sorry but you cant claim that those land barons thought of their workers as some kind of Servants.

the blacks in the south were not Servants. There is a huge difference. Servants have rights, Servants are primarily free, Servants are primarily in servitude voluntarily. Slaves are owned. Slaves have no rights. Slaves are property and commodity, like livestock on a farm, like a herd of buffallo, or cattle. They do not have any freedom, save that given by whoever owns them.

3) Well, that IS true...but then, since when do you take seriously, the thoughts of those who are poor representatives? Would you take moral lessons from a hypocrit? Even if those moral lessons were true...and we despute that these are true in the first place when it comes to what you presume is "GOD-Given Rights"

I dont believe there is any such thing as Human Rights in terms of the absolute nature of Truth, only what man perscribes to man, in accordance with its culture, and according to its relative chronology and zeitgiest...after all...in Europe...as often inspired by Americans...they have gone mad with this ideal of "Human rights" to the extent that they cant even deport foreign convicted criminals, because apparently they have the right to "a family life" which would be ruined by returning them from whence they came...and how about the prison sufferegets, who believe that prisoners should be allowed to vote in general ellections, because everyone has the right to exercise their democratic right to vote...all of these, so the European Court of Human Rights would have us believe are "GOD-Given" aswell.

What a load of bollox :)

NateR
02-03-2014, 03:49 PM
I think your logic here is flawed. Just because a few people abuse the concept of human rights doesn't make the concept itself false.

As Christians we understand that everything we have is given to us by GOD. From the breath in our lungs to the food in our bellies, even our life itself.

So, GOD grants life. No one claiming to be a Christian can deny that.

Liberty. A person's natural desire is for freedom. Of course that desire gets corrupted because we are sinful, so liberty in this sense is NOT the freedom to pursue immoral or evil desires. It's the freedom to pursue the desires that GOD has placed in each and every one of our hearts. This is something that is a bit more difficult for non-Christians to understand, but it should be another no-brainer for Christians.

This is also where the two greatest commandments come into play: love GOD above all else and treat others the way you would like to be treated. If you keep those two commandments, then you can never abuse your liberty. The Founding Fathers understood this and it's why they warned us that the great American experiment would fail if our country abandoned the Christian values that we were founded upon.

The pursuit of happiness is simply the drive to live our lives according to the unique design that GOD has given each and every one of us. For some that might be raising a family, for others it might be art or music, still others might have a bent towards animal husbandry or farming. The list goes on and people can even have combinations of multiple GOD-given desires.

Governments can only infringe upon those basic rights and they do that with rigor, all the time. Even America itself has become corrupted to the point where American citizens don't even understand what this country was founded upon. Some of those people end up in the government and they might even end up in the highest seats of government (like the Presidency for example).

So, it's an ideal that America was founded upon; but that doesn't mean that we are always the best representatives of that ideal.

Tyburn
02-04-2014, 06:14 PM
1) As Christians we understand that everything we have is given to us by GOD. From the breath in our lungs to the food in our bellies, even our life itself.

So, GOD grants life. No one claiming to be a Christian can deny that.

2) Liberty. A person's natural desire is for freedom. Of course that desire gets corrupted because we are sinful, so liberty in this sense is NOT the freedom to pursue immoral or evil desires. It's the freedom to pursue the desires that GOD has placed in each and every one of our hearts. This is something that is a bit more difficult for non-Christians to understand, but it should be another no-brainer for Christians.

This is also where the two greatest commandments come into play: love GOD above all else and treat others the way you would like to be treated. If you keep those two commandments, then you can never abuse your liberty. The Founding Fathers understood this and it's why they warned us that the great American experiment would fail if our country abandoned the Christian values that we were founded upon.

3) The pursuit of happiness is simply the drive to live our lives according to the unique design that GOD has given each and every one of us. For some that might be raising a family, for others it might be art or music, still others might have a bent towards animal husbandry or farming. The list goes on and people can even have combinations of multiple GOD-given desires.

Governments can only infringe upon those basic rights and they do that with rigor, all the time. Even America itself has become corrupted to the point where American citizens don't even understand what this country was founded upon. Some of those people end up in the government and they might even end up in the highest seats of government (like the Presidency for example).

So, it's an ideal that America was founded upon; but that doesn't mean that we are always the best representatives of that ideal.

1) Suddenly you've dropped calvinism have you again? :laugh: You rightly (pardon the pun) use the word "Grant"

GOD GRANTS lots of things...just like Matt Hughes might Grant an interview...does it mean that the receptor has a "Right" to that?

NO...What GOD gives is discretionary....a GIFT...you have NO rights under a Supreme Monarchy...The reason you probably dont understand that is the fundemental problem here.

Who do you think GOD is? and where exactly do you think YOU fit in to the food chain. You've been in the Military, this should be a no-brainer! You dont have "Rights" except those given to you by Authority...England, for Centuries was runned by a Supreme Monarch, in EXACTLY the way Martial Law in the military works.

2) You have no degree in sociology I presume, or you would know that people do not always seek freedom. They usually are satisfied with whatever they are used to, and some people, are naturally submissive and would find the idea of "Freedom" as horrifying as an agrophobic person being pushed outside.

We have drives to survive, and instincts...but the only Spiritual desire we have is to seek for purpose, meaning and to understand ourselves...that is because we were made as a half, with GOD providing fulfilment...and that is why we search.

Give freedom to a people who are not, and never have been democratic, and you end up endagenering the whole geographic location. Give someone who has been locked up fourty years, complete freedom, and they will probably struggle to cope to do anything.

People can be trained, Nathan, to accept all kinds of things...Again, having been in the military, I am shocked by your responces above.

3) The persuit of happiness, and a Vocational Calling, are NOT the same...infact I can give you Biblical Examples, of what a load of bollox that is. Shall we start with Moses and his response, when GOD gave him his calling. infact, its more likely you will be called in a place well outside of your comfort zone.

That has the duel purpose of stopping one taking too much pride in ones own achievements, when really, one knows that it is only the strength of GOD that allows them to do something which they, themselves, are NOT good at.

I tell you what...Proove it too me....Back up each of your Rights with a passage of Scripture, and I'll consider your POV in more depth. :laugh: oh yes...Nathan...YOU taught me well :happydancing:

rearnakedchoke
02-04-2014, 08:40 PM
i have to agree with dave .. as long as i have been on this site, i have been told that if it isn't in scripture, it isn't biblical .. nate, you said somewhere up ^^^^ that the founding fathers used the bible to determine what was just, but you didnt know the verses .... the term "god given right" is thrown around a lot, especially for gun rights .. LOL ... i have no problem with someone saying, we have a right to bear arms given to us by the founding fathers of this country .. but saying god given without backing it up gives it no merit ...

NateR
02-04-2014, 10:48 PM
1) Suddenly you've dropped calvinism have you again?

Exactly what did I say that contradicts Calvinism? :huh: GOD grants life. It's a fact and that statement is fully in keeping with the 5 points of Calvinism.

Again, having been in the military, I am shocked by your responces above.

Aaaand your knowledge of the military seems to be just as deficient as your knowledge of Calvinism.

People don't join the military because they hate freedom and like to be dominated. That's idiotic. American citizens join the military because they love freedom and understand that it's worth temporarily putting their own personal freedoms on hold in order to defend freedom for all other Americans.

I'll get around to responding to the rest of your comments later.

Tyburn
02-05-2014, 07:37 PM
1) Exactly what did I say that contradicts Calvinism? :huh: GOD grants life. It's a fact and that statement is fully in keeping with the 5 points of Calvinism.



2) Aaaand your knowledge of the military seems to be just as deficient as your knowledge of Calvinism.

People don't join the military because they hate freedom and like to be dominated. That's idiotic. American citizens join the military because they love freedom and understand that it's worth temporarily putting their own personal freedoms on hold in order to defend freedom for all other Americans.

I'll get around to responding to the rest of your comments later.

1) The core principle of Calvinism is that things a pre-destined, and the reason they are pre-destined is because we can not initiate, because we are so sinful. If you love GOD, for example, Calvinists dont believe its because you choose to love GOD, but because GOD has chosen you to Love him, and initiated.

Someone in that position has NO rights. Not the right to free will, not the right to choose. They...more then any other denomination would denounce the ideals of any Rights period.

2) :laugh: I think you miss understood me Nathan...I was actually talking about two different things...the Military as Heirachical....and dominance and submission...NOT Dominance and submission within the Military Heirachy.

One was to demonstrate to you YOUR position UNDER God...and One was to Demonstrate that your original premise about everyone wanting to be free is not a universal.

If you bothered to read my post...you would see...they arent even in the same numbered return. :blink: I cant wait to hear the rest of your responses..along I hope with your scriptural points to back up your argument...but in your own time Nathan :laugh:

Tyburn
02-05-2014, 07:41 PM
i have to agree with dave .. as long as i have been on this site, i have been told that if it isn't in scripture, it isn't biblical .. nate, you said somewhere up ^^^^ that the founding fathers used the bible to determine what was just, but you didnt know the verses .... the term "god given right" is thrown around a lot, especially for gun rights .. LOL ... i have no problem with someone saying, we have a right to bear arms given to us by the founding fathers of this country .. but saying god given without backing it up gives it no merit ...

:happydancing: The Student has become The Master :happydancing:

:laugh:

NateR
02-06-2014, 10:35 PM
1) The core principle of Calvinism is that things a pre-destined, and the reason they are pre-destined is because we can not initiate, because we are so sinful. If you love GOD, for example, Calvinists dont believe its because you choose to love GOD, but because GOD has chosen you to Love him, and initiated.

Someone in that position has NO rights. Not the right to free will, not the right to choose. They...more then any other denomination would denounce the ideals of any Rights period.


You're kind of almost halfway right, but then you just go and take a wild left turn in that second paragraph and get everything wrong.

GOD is sovereign, no one claiming to be a Christian can deny that. The Bible is also clear that love for GOD, faith and salvation are not possible if human beings are left to their own devices. In our natural state, we are haters of GOD and everything that GOD stands for. So that part is true.

However, understanding that we must be submissive to GOD is completely unrelated to being submissive to human governments. In fact, more often than not, human governments require their citizens to participate in actions that are a direct violation of GOD's law. In those cases, the government becomes a barrier between people and GOD and submission to those types of governments becomes a sin.

I personally hate using the term "Calvinism" because the 5 points of Calvinism predate John Calvin, the Church and even the New Testament. They can be found throughout the Bible, going all the way back to Genesis.

However, many Calvinists were instrumental in the formation of the United States and they absolutely did not denounce the idea of human rights. In fact, the US federal government was actually based on the structure of the Presbyterian church (a Calvinist denomination). In it's early days it was referred to as a "presbyterian government."

Finally, the truth of GOD's sovereignty does not mean that human rights don't exist. That's 100% false and not even a logical conclusion to draw; so I'm not really sure how you are coming up with that.

So, you should take the time to really examine what other people believe and not just assume that you can guess what they believe based on your own incomplete understanding of the topic.

I cant wait to hear the rest of your responses..along I hope with your scriptural points to back up your argument...but in your own time Nathan

Honestly an internet debate is not a real priority for me right now. Plus, I want to give myself enough time to really think this through and understand why I believe what I believe before responding. It might take days, months or even years, but I'll get around to responding eventually.

Since silence on the internet is often falsely interpreted as surrender or submission, some people like to prematurely claim victory in a topic just because the person holding the opposing viewpoint doesn't instantly respond. However, if you really want a thoughtful, intelligent debate, then you can't fault people for taking the time to research and contemplate their responses.