Search results

Jeremiah 31:33 " . . . I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts . . . " What law did God put in your inward parts and write in your heart, Hoping? Is it the Old Testament law? Or is it something else? If it isn't the OT, then does whatever law is in your inward...

Yes they are. Rights against being murdered, being raped, being kidnapped, rights against being perjured against, rights against cruel and unusual punishment, these and many others are absolute. Laws do this all the time, immoral laws. And this means throw out the baby with the bathwater, to...

Their conviction is that universal human rights exist. And yet they believe in human rights. They are our allies, not our enemies. Our enemies would be all those who don't believe in human rights. Like China.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident..." It's pretty strong. The limit right now isn't the Constitution, it's all the independent sovereign states who aren't under it right now. It's democratically 'directed'. You mean partisan. So what did you actually mean.

So iow they are correct, you just don't like their reasoning.

The Civil War was righteously waged based on the Declaration. It's the strongest 'scheme' we have. That's what the Supreme Court is for, and that is 'directed' democratically. I don't know what you mean.

Are you denying that there are many atheists who believe in human rights, or not?

They base it on self-evidence, which is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence.

All other moral theories have been dispatched since human rights were finally recognized. Because we judge all other moral and ethical theories against our conception of human rights. Which means that human rights are the moral theory now.

There are plenty of people who believe in human rights and are atheists.

Switzerland. And it's not untenable, it's just long term. It is, but it's been done. It was done successfully and completely in Germany and in Japan after WWII, and it was even done successfully in the American South after the Civil War----except that occupation was aborted due to partisan...

Agreed.

Taiwan?

It would have to start small. Like, the US and UK first, let's figure out how to combine ourselves back together again after over two centuries apart. Then let's see about Canada maybe, or Australia, or ... France or Germany. Let's just start small and we'll just 'snowball' into one world...

Great. HITLER'S, EVIL

We need one world order. Nukes are dangerous threats because we have enemies, enemies go away with one world order. There's no countries attacking other countries when we're all one country. The one constitution and one global regime is either going to be brand new, or it will be an extension...

You're hopeless then, Hoping. And now irrelevant. Assassinating Hitler is so much not a sin, that if you had the opportunity to assassinate Hitler and you didn't----that would be a sin, and a very, very serious one.

What should we do? Of course avoiding WWIII but beyond that, what should we do? Russians could just slowly 'snuff out' all the Ukrainian resistance, they can take their 'sweet time', because in avoiding WWIII, none of us are going to do a thing to stop him just winning a brutal war of...

I don't think there's any doubt about it. The thing is, now that this has happened----now what do we do. Cold War was supposed to be over in 1991. It's not. Now what?

Could turn out that WWI WWII & WWIII all started there? I'm going to go with no