well tutt I agree with you, but then I don't think any marriage rights are natural rights any more the right to bare arms is a natural right
The right to bear arms is the right to protect oneself and one's liberty . Marriage is not a natural right .It has been defined by institutions for thousands of years;with specific requirements required to qualify .
That would come under a protection against the misuse of power by a government authority. This and most of the other Amendments can be regarded as a protection of natural rights.
This is why it is was an absurdity for someone to suggest that natural rights has nothing to do with American law. It has a great deal to do with it.However, natural rights are not the only rights enjoyed by a society.
To cut a long story short. Natural rights are those rights that are anterior to all other rights. They are anterior because one does not need an organized society to grant natural rights. They already exist. Organized society grants rights as well, but rights granted by a society cannot conflict with natural rights. Natural rights takes precedent.
I don't think anyone here is arguing that "gay marriage rights" are in any way natural rights. At least I hope they are not.
I'll go a step further and say there is zero mandate for the black robed, appointed for life oligarchs, to impose extreme societal change on the country. If indeed the nation is "evolving" ,and the definition of marriage is to be re-defined ,then it is not up to the courts of the land to make that call.
The entire history of America is about the struggle of groups to be recognized as free citizens and define themselves. Look it up, and substitute gay for women, and blacks and you will see the same patterns repeated over, and over.
Gays can be legally married already in some states but not recognized in others, so DOMA is already dead in parts of America. Where there is money and benefits involved everyone should be able to benefit from it. Not just the select traditional few.
the right to bear arms is the right to protect oneself and one's liberty . Marriage is not a natural right .It has been defined by institutions for thousands of years;with specific requirements required to qualify .
Yes, you can certainly argue that self-defense is a natural right, but probably not a lot past that. As you know natural rights are derived from a state of nature prior to there being an organized society to grant such rights.
A well organized militia would be post-hock explanation. In other words, one must have an organized society to begin with in order to render this a possibility.
That clause of the 2nd amendment is an extension of the individual natural right of self defense. It is clearly written as a limit to the power of the national government ;as all the bill of right amendments are .
Well geez, back then, in the beginning that was an issue. Its not government you need to be armed against, it's the crazy people with guns that live down the street.
It is clearly written as a limit to the power of the national governmen
It was. The problem is the right wing still thinks their puny assault weapons are going to do the job...
No, SERIOUSLY... They believe they can defeat the U.S. Army. Somewhere along the line, the weapons people could bear STOPPED being a defense against the U.S. Government... Yet, somehow the right wing totally missed it. How do they MISS so much important stuff?
Not only that, they believe that when the shooting starts, the entire military will join their side. No, SERIOUSLY, they BELIEVE that stuff.
It was. The problem is the right wing still thinks their puny assault weapons are gonna do the job...
No, SERIOUSLY.... They believe they can defeat the U.S. Army. Somewhere along the line, the weapons people could bear STOPPED being a defense against the U.S. Government... Yet, somehow the right wing totally missed it. How do they MISS so much important stuff?
excon
So if the government became a totalitarian state you would lie back and take it with the sheeple ? I kind of doubt that .
So ex, you're really more troubled by the thought of us having an AR-15 than you are the idea of the feds sending the military in to slaughter us? Seems like kind of backward thinking to me.
Well geez, back then, in the beginning that was an issue. Its not government you need to be armed against, its the crazy people with guns that live down the street.
Hardly... its never been more inportant for the population to be armed than it is now with a brain dead.egomanic sociopath that HATES the Constitution and the Bill of rights, and whities everywhere (he said as much in his autobiographies that HE wrote) in office like we have now.
you're really more troubled by the thought of us having an AR-15 than you are the idea of the feds sending the military in to slaughter us? Seems like kind of backward thinking to me.
Let's talk about backwards...
There's only ONE side talking about their guns. There's only ONE side taking about a tyrannical government... There's only ONE side talking about using force against the other..
And, it AIN'T my side...
Of course, I'd be concerned if the government attacked you. But, YOUR side is the one talking about this CRAP. The government ISN'T threatening you.. It's really NOT. It's not even close... It's YOUR side who brings it up...
I'm simply reminding you, that if you attack this great country of MINE, you will be destroyed... I KNOW you don't like to hear it... But, I don't want to hear about how your weapons protect you against a government who ISN'T threatening you...
There's only ONE side talking about their guns. There's only ONE side taking about a tyrannical government... There's only ONE side talking about using force against the other..
And, it AIN'T my side...
Of course, I'd be concerned if the government attacked you. But, YOUR side is the one talking about this CRAP. The government ISN'T threatening you.. It's really NOT. It's not even close... It's YOUR side who brings it up...
I'm simply reminding you, that if you attack this great country of MINE, you will be destroyed... I KNOW you don't like to hear it... But, I don't wanna hear about how your weapons protect you against a government who ISN'T threatening you...
Now, THAT'S backwards!!
excon
I don't know anyone on "my side" talking about attacking our country (that's a straw man). Maybe that's why you can't win fantasy football, you can't tell the difference between offense and defense?
Gee... yesterdays freedom loving hippies are today's worst oppressors of personal freedom. Talk about A 180 degree change.
I know you're not good at actually arguing. You'd rather throw up a bumper sticker... But, please TRY to tell me how a universal background check oppresses you?
You HAVE read where I've mentioned that a universal background check would STOP people like me from getting guns. I cannot imagine, WHY a right winger would be AGAINST a law that PREVENTED people like me from getting guns.
You're not going to tell me that I can pick one up in the hood for a few bucks, are you?? Really??
I never said all the loonies were white. I never said all the conservatives were white. Doesn't matter to me, the conservative right are loonies, and the further right they are, the crazier they talk.
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
