Food Should be Free

[el numero uno]

Food is a right. Water is a right. A warm home is a right. Health care is a right. Education is a right. A good paying job is a right. The problem is the government has no money. Only the money they take from the workers. When people who vote for a living out number those that work for a living the whole system will collapse in poverty like all socialist and communist countries do. The only kind and compassionate system in the history of this planet is capitalism.  You are free to make as much money as you can. America might be the only country in this world that has obese poor people. Poor people all over the world are starving and our poor people are waddling around fat. God bless the USA. A country the whole world wishes they lived in. God bless Trump. Fuck you millennial socialists living in your mom's basement that want government to take care of you.

Poor people on low income countries can also be obese!

Access to cheap carbohydrates is a worlwide phenomen at this point. The only countries where people are actually starving are communist regimes or war-torn places.

[pellius]

another person can take all those rights away from you if they are bigger and stronger..

Owning something and having a right to something are two different things but are intrinsically linked, but yes, you only own something because other people allow you to..

There is a huge conversation to be had about the existence of ownership and its actual definition, one that would take up far more time than we have on here

That's an odd way at looking at it. Depriving someone of their rights does not mean that you are giving them this right. When that happens it's taking away someone's right. It's like saying you don't have any right to live. You are alive only because I, and others, allow it.

So one has the right to obtain food for himself but he does not have the right to have his food provided by someone else, i.e., forcing others to serve them. That would be depriving them of their rights.

[pellius]

Many "leftys" support socialized programs which help those in need survive. This is different than always wanting free stuff. There are plenty of folks on the right who rely on social benefits. What is interesting is that some of the folks who claim to be against socialized government have no problem benefiting from it.

It's one thing for a person to give "free money" to help others. It's quite another to have a third party take your money and give it to someone else because they think they need it more than you do. If someone robbed you at gunpoint but said he was going to give to the homeless people in his area would that make you feel better?

I don't blame people who benefit from Social programs even though they would vote to eliminate it. Their money has already been taken away from them through taxes.

[joswift]

That's an odd way at looking at it. Depriving someone of their rights does not mean that you are giving them this right. When that happens it's taking away someone's right. It's like saying you don't have any right to live. You are alive only because I, and others, allow it.

So one has the right to obtain food for himself but he does not have the right to have his food provided by someone else, i.e., forcing others to serve them. That would be depriving them of their rights.

do animals in the wild have rights?
No, they are either predators or prey.
Human rights are a man made construct.

Life works like this
You can do whatever you want, but if other people dont like what you are doing they will stop you...

Thats it, thats the one over riding rule...

[pellius]

do animals in the wild have rights?
No, they are either predators or prey.
Human rights are a man made construct.

Life works like this
You can do whatever you want, but if other people dont like what you are doing they will stop you...

Thats it, thats the one over riding rule...

You can do whatever you want but you can't force others to do what you want. That is depriving them of their rights. Rights that they had independent of you and your desires. That's why you have the right to obtain food (do what you want) but you do not have the right to have others provide it for you.

The difference is in our world view. I believe in God and the basis for which this country was founded as stated in the Declaration of Independence and what made our country great.

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.

[joswift]

You can do whatever you want but you can't force others to do what you want. That is depriving them of their rights. Rights that they had independent of you and your desires. That's why you have the right to obtain food (do what you want) but you do not have the right to have others provide it for you.

The difference is in our world view. I believe in God and the basis for which this country was founded as stated in the Declaration of Independence and what made our country great.

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.

and it was men that wrote the constitution, not God, it was men that gave other men rights, and it is men that can take those rights away.

God has nothing to do with it

[pellius]

and it was men that wrote the constitution, not God, it was men that gave other men rights, and it is men that can take those rights away.

God has nothing to do with it

God has everything to do with it. Again, that's the difference. We have different beliefs. I believe that the universe was created by a Creator, i.e., God. You believe that the universe just created itself out of nothing. I think your point of view is just as silly and preposterous as you think mine is.

That's why I find your view on human rights very odd. Everything you have, even your existence, is made possible only because I and others allow it.

[Marvin Martian]

You are a disgrace to those that truly follow the Nazarene.

Well - if there is one thing that Jew taught - it was judge others. You member - make sure to cast stones and all that shit. Plus if remember correctly he was big on making a huge spectacle about how pious one is.

But - what the hell did he know? He was a broke ass Jew! Now - his daddy the sky wizard THAT is a cat you can really get behind.... Noooo - not like that Prime... Damn it I saw your eyes widen there for a sec. the last thing this place needs is hellfire being rained on us because the ole sissy was trying to have butt sex with a man and his son!

[joswift]

God has everything to do with it. Again, that's the difference. We have different beliefs. I believe that the universe was created by a Creator, i.e., God. You believe that the universe just created itself out of nothing. I think your point of view is just as silly and preposterous as you think mine is.

That's why I find your view on human rights very odd. Everything you have, even your existence, is made possible only because I and others allow it.

You havent provided any evidence to contradict that claim..

[pellius]

You havent provided any evidence to contradict that claim..

Neither have you.

[Humble Narcissist]

You havent provided any evidence to contradict that claim..

Read some Ayn Rand.

[joswift]

Neither have you.

you have evidence of how the world works, go outside your door and start doing something that other people are not happy about.

Laws, societies and democracies are built on the very foundation of this principle

Laws are what the majority of people agree are boundaries that people shouldn't cross and we take people to task and stop them doing it if they do.

Morals are based exactly the same way, they are simply what the collective agrees are acceptable

If you want to make the claim that God granted people inalienable rights the first thing you need to do is prove the existance of God, without doing that you have zero claim.

God was created by man, not the other way around...

[joswift]

Read some Ayn Rand.

So you want me to read a book by a human being to contradict the proof that man created rights?

Think about it logically, without language there would be no rights, rights are a man made construct, jeez, its not rocket science.

[pellius]

you have evidence of how the world works, go outside your door and start doing something that other people are not happy about.

Laws, societies and democracies are built on the very foundation of this principle

Laws are what the majority of people agree are boundaries that people shouldn't cross and we take people to task and stop them doing it if they do.

Morals are based exactly the same way, they are simply what the collective agrees are acceptable

If you want to make the claim that God granted people inalienable rights the first thing you need to do is prove the existance of God, without doing that you have zero claim.

God was created by man, not the other way around...

No one can prove the existence of God. Just like you can't prove that the universe just created itself out of nothing. Both positions require a leap of faith. I just think your view it more preposterous.

And when you leave it to man to just decided what he thinks is moral you get things like human sacrifice and slavery.

You trust human nature to determine what's right. I do not.

[bigkid]

The left wants poor people to be stuck on social programs for life so the have generational voters for life.  They don't "care more", like they try to portray.  It's all about them gaining voters so they can have more control.  Sick group of individuals.

[joswift]

No one can prove the existence of God. Just like you can't prove that the universe just created itself out of nothing. Both positions require a leap of faith. I just think your view it more preposterous.

And when you leave it to man to just decided what he thinks is moral you get things like human sacrifice and slavery.

You trust human nature to determine what's right. I do not.

I dont have to prove the Universe was created out of nothing, I have no idea how the Universe came into being.
That has nothing to do with my point, I am talking about rights being man made constructs, as opposed to your viewpoint that they were created by God..

You have zero evidence they were created by God, I have the irrefutable evidence they were created by man..

https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/human-rights/what-are-human-rights/history-human-rights

http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/edumat/hreduseries/hereandnow/Part-1/short-history.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_human_rights


Your only argument is "God made them"

[pellius]

I dont have to prove the Universe was created out of nothing, I have no idea how the Universe came into being.
That has nothing to do with my point, I am talking about rights being man made constructs, as opposed to your viewpoint that they were created by God..

You have zero evidence they were created by God, I have the irrefutable evidence they were created by man..

https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/human-rights/what-are-human-rights/history-human-rights

http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/edumat/hreduseries/hereandnow/Part-1/short-history.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_human_rights


Your only argument is "God made them"

Don't bother with the links. I'm not going to read them. I can post links, too. I want to hear what you think.

Yes, morality comes from God. It does matter if the universe has a creator or if everything just created itself. If there is no after life, no accountability, if Mother Theresa and Saddam Hussein share the same ultimate fate then the whole concept of good and evil is meaningless. It's just what you decide it is based on the moment and feeling and what you can get away with. I definitely did not do things that I would have done if I thought there was no final judgement on my soul.

"Without God, all is permitted."

-- Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

[joswift]

Don't bother with the links. I'm not going to read them. I can post links, too. I want to hear what you think.

Yes, morality comes from God. It does matter if the universe has a creator or if everything just created itself. If there is no after life, no accountability, if Mother Theresa and Saddam Hussein share the same ultimate fate then the whole concept of good and evil is meaningless. It's just what you decide it is based on the moment and feeling and what you can get away with. I definitely did not do things that I would have done if I thought there was no final judgement on my soul.

"Without God, all is permitted."

-- Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

You cant keep saying morality comes from God without any evidence to substantiate it, I cant accept things on blind faith.

I dont do things because they will put me in prison if I do them, its consequences in this life that keeps people on the straight and narrow, not some mystical belief in some imaginary afterlife.

As for Dostoevskys quote, it could just as well read "With rules, all is permitted"

[Al Doggity]

It's just what you decide it is based on the moment and feeling and what you can get away with. I definitely did not do things that I would have done if I thought there was no final judgement on my soul.

Plenty of people have a sense of morality without it being explicitly linked to God.  Most people have a very simple and effective moral barometer- it is wrong to hurt others. There are situations when it gets more complicated, but that's generally the heart of most ethical dilemmas, regardless of whether you believe in a God or not.  People with no religious ties constantly make *moral, good* decisions because of how they will  help others. Or how they will be seen others. They don't factor going to hell.  Likewise, just  joswift alluded to, many religious people do immoral things because they feel they won't experience consequences here on earth. They aren't factoring in the afterlife.

[pellius]

You cant keep saying morality comes from God without any evidence to substantiate it, I cant accept things on blind faith.

I dont do things because they will put me in prison if I do them, its consequences in this life that keeps people on the straight and narrow, not some mystical belief in some imaginary afterlife.

As for Dostoevskys quote, it could just as well read "With rules, all is permitted"

Yes, I can. People of faith do or not do things not because it is illegal but because it is immoral -- including myself.  Many do not commit adultery not because of they think
it's illegal but because it's immoral.

But before I can continue to have a discussion about morality I need to know that we are operating under the same premise. As I've stated before, I know it is unlikely that either of us will convince the other but what I clarity regarding the arguments presented. So to continue, so I know what direction to go in, we have to start from the same premise otherwise it is pointless.

Do you believe that morality -- moral good and evil actually exist. Not just a matter of personal taste or do you believe that all morality is just a matter of personal opinion?

 

[joswift]

Plenty of people have a sense of morality without it being explicitly linked to God.  Most people have a very simple and effective moral barometer- it is wrong to hurt others. There are situations when it gets more complicated, but that's generally the heart of most ethical dilemmas, regardless of whether you believe in a God or not.  People with no religious ties constantly make *moral, good* decisions because of how they will  help others. Or how they will be seen others. They don't factor going to hell.  Likewise, just  joswift alluded to, many religious people do immoral things because they feel they won't experience consequences here on earth. They aren't factoring in the afterlife.

and many religious people (catholics especially) believe as as long as they go to church on Sunday and attend confession they can have their sins in this life forgiven, and as such do unspeakable wrong to other people day in day out...

[joswift]

Yes, I can. People of faith do or not do things not because it is illegal but because it is immoral -- including myself.  Many do not commit adultery not because of they think
it's illegal but because it's immoral.

But before I can continue to have a discussion about morality I need to know that we are operating under the same premise. As I've stated before, I know it is unlikely that either of us will convince the other but what I clarity regarding the arguments presented. So to continue, so I know what direction to go in, we have to start from the same premise otherwise it is pointless.

Do you believe that morality -- moral good and evil actually exist. Not just a matter of personal taste or do you believe that all morality is just a matter of personal opinion?

 

I think people do good things and people do bad things, so yes, good and evil do exist, in fact without one you cannot have the other.

Almost all people of sound mind know what is right and wrong, but now we get down to cultural good and evil.
Depending where you are born and raised your belief of what is right and wrong is based on what you are taught.

as Al doggity wrote, there really is only one real rule, "cause no harm or loss to another human being", thats pretty much a Golden Rule, anything else is just additional padding..

[pellius]

and many religious people (catholics especially) believe as as long as they go to church on Sunday and attend confession they can have their sins in this life forgiven, and as such do unspeakable wrong to other people day in day out...

As someone who was born and raised a Catholic you are absolutely wrong. People who claim to be Catholics and Christians can believe anything they want but that is not the tenets of the faith.

[pellius]

I think people do good things and people do bad things, so yes, good and evil do exist, in fact without one you cannot have the other.

Almost all people of sound mind know what is right and wrong, but now we get down to cultural good and evil.
Depending where you are born and raised your belief of what is right and wrong is based on what you are taught.

as Al doggity wrote, there really is only one real rule, "cause no harm or loss to another human being", thats pretty much a Golden Rule, anything else is just additional padding..

There is no disagreement as to the concept of right and wrong, good and evil. But is there a moral value system outside and above an individual person or is good and evil just a matter of personal opinion.

To say all people of sound mind know what is right and wrong. And then you follow that by saying those values come from their culture and how you were raised. So-called "Palestinians" are taught as children to hate Jews and to kill them. Are they not of sound mind? Do you consider this right as they do?

And there are many instances where you would cause harm and loss to another for the greater good. For instance, killing someone that wants to kill or harm you. Disciplining a child for misbehavior. Firing someone from a job because you want to cut costs.

Anyway, I have to get back to life but I'll be back. I like these kinds of discussions.

[joswift]

As someone who was born and raised a Catholic you are absolutely wrong. People who claim to be Catholics and Christians can believe anything they want but that is not the tenets of the faith.

I was born and tried to be raised as a christian but as soon as I worked out the futility and in my opinion stupidity of it all (I was about 11) and I have seen first hand the behaviour of many catholics in my time to know it to be true.