The Second Amendment does NOT give you the right to bear arms.

[mav]

I've never been able to accept that God, who created the universe, is also a petty little rule-following jobsworth when it comes to admitting the souls of the deceased to heaven.

Seems more likely to me that He would make a picosecond evaluation of your entire life and the contents of your heart before coming to a decision.

Then you’ll have all kinds of issues with the Matrix theory, that this reality is a simulation... in which case who knows how petty “God”, the creator of the simulation, is when you consider the evil that has been allowed in the name of “free will”.

 

[jkelly1229]

A huge issue is that 56% of Americans don’t believe in god.

citation: (the daily wire is the source of this statistic)

Doesn't matter what diety you do or don't believe in..you were born you have the basic right to self defense.

 

[Jason Flare]

“....that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,...”

There’s no “God” in the Bill of Rights.

 

[jkelly1229]

The fervently non religious struggle with this. It is really quite simple. The beast known as Man left without structure will run amok and consume itself. You don’t even have to believe in God to understand. Just look around...

I disagree... im not overtly religious

However my theory is man needs fear to rule their thought process.

The relatively safe and secure lifestyle we currently enjoy is pretty unheard of.

We can satisfy all the basic human needs without much effort.

This leads to perception that everything in life isn't suited for a meritocracy. Which leads to the downturn in society.

You put a person considering sexual re-assignment in some of those African villages where you gotta walk 5 miles for water... chances they stop caring about having a dick or not.

Same thing with racism... have a half ton full of child soldiers rolling up on you. Weirdly enough making sure people have diversity in the work place is less important.

 

[FrugalFannie]

The Second Amendment does NOT give you the right to bear arms, God does. The 2A prevents the government from infringing on that right.

If anyone argues with you about that, tell them to read the constitution again and stop arguing in bad faith.

So, as an atheist, am I denied my rights?

I agree the constitution is SUPPOSED to keep the government from infringing the right. But I believe it to be a "natural right" as in every being has a right to life, not "god granted." (and yes, I oppose abortion on the same basis)

 

[Nick Fury]

I disagree... im not overtly religious

However my theory is man needs fear to rule their thought process.

You say you disagree yet support what I just posted.

 

[free]

The Second Amendment does NOT give you the right to bear arms, God does. The 2A prevents the government from infringing on that right.

If anyone argues with you about that, tell them to read the constitution again and stop arguing in bad faith.

 

[MisterHappy]

I think heaven is something we can create for ourselves.

heaven is a place on earth - Google Search

www.google.com

 

[DJBrad]

So, as an atheist, am I denied my rights?

I agree the constitution is SUPPOSED to keep the government from infringing the right. But I believe it to be a "natural right" as in every being has a right to life, not "god granted." (and yes, I oppose abortion on the same basis)

God cause his sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the just and the unjust alike (Mt 5:45). So yeah, the 2A is for you too my friend. We could talk about universal healthcare but nah.....that’s not in the COTUS.

 

[jrpascucci]

The Second Amendment does NOT give you the right to bear arms, God does. The 2A prevents the government from infringing on that right.

If anyone argues with you about that, tell them to read the constitution again and stop arguing in bad faith.

You are correct.

The underlying natural right is properly defined as a "right of the innocent to defense against the unjust aggressor", as a positive extension of the right to life, liberty, property: this all starts with having a proper anthropology.

This is one of very few natural rights that had a corresponding duty on others: you'll note it doesn't say "self-defense" (although that too is implied).
Other rights that have a corresponding duty on others are things like: the natural right of the individual to public truth, the natural right of assistance for the unable (i.e. to food and water, it's why Aquinas affirmed that someone stealing bread from someone who is not in need to feed someone who is in immediate need is not an evil (which evil being properly defined as "the deprivation of a due good").

There are various levels of formal and material duty: formal duty is that which requires (positive) assent to happen, and material duty is that which requires (negative) permission or marginal utility to happen. (So, votes, judgements, legislation, and private agreements are formal things.)

This duty is attenuated, but not nullified, by 'moral distance' (proximal versus remote). The reason for this is that we are finite: moral proximality has to do with how many independent moral agents are involved in the chain of enablement. So, a vote on legislation is a formal approval that is morally proximal. Buying things from China is materially permissive and morally remote: many people are between you and the bad things going on in China, most of which are not defective.

Further, we can learn a few other things from the proper definition: there is 'just aggression' (which is directly contrary to the PNC, which is why anyone could lean libertarian, but why nobody should actually be a libertarian: PNC and being entirely laissez fair' is, strictly, a defect of a due good). The 'aggressor' could be an individual, but it also could be a demos - the will of the majority can be itself unjust, and it is right to defend the innocent from the will of the majority (for Aristotle, this is one of the fundamental differences between a 'polity' (good) and a 'democracy' (bad))

Finally, since (almost) none are completely innocent, the 'level' of innocence required is in that context of the aggression: a police officer beating an unresisting drug-dealer is morally unjust, even if the drug-dealer deserves a beating. This is the essence of the 'presumption of innocence': the State (which derives from the people, says Aquinas) is attempting to restore justice (to a greater degree) by using aggression, and (ought) limits itself to only good means with no defects.

Finally, finally: in the final tally, the truth of innocence must take precedence over the good of justice within the imperfect and finite framework we find ourselves operating in.

 

[daekken]

More than 99% of Americans have not read the bill of rights or the constitution.

I highly, highly doubt that. While the amount of people that could recite the bill of rights or have it memorized is undoubtedly low, nearly every school child has at least read the Bill of Rights and/or Constitution. What's your cite for this or was this purely a rhetoric device?

We have one of the lowest rated education systems in the world.

The US population is ranked as the sixth most educated. The US school system, while lagging behind other developed nations, is usually placed in the 20s or 30s internationally. There's over 200 countries, so by any metric that's not "one of the lowest in the world." It puts us in the top 10% or so. We should be higher, but we're not among the bottom.

Yet we pay the most in taxes collectively to fund our corrupt government.

Yet we pay among the lowest individual taxes among the developed world (which is not to say I want higher taxes; certainly not).

 

[fshalor]

A lot of people are either woefully ignorant about this fact or choose to ignore it.

Thomas Paine has been all but purged from our education. It's sad. The original voice for common sense governance in my wimpy opinion.

 

[jkelly1229]

You say you disagree yet support what I just posted.

I took what you said differently... like you're blaming people's lack of faith as what's going on now

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The Second Amendment does NOT give you the right to bear arms, God does. The 2A prevents the government from infringing on that right.

If anyone argues with you about that, tell them to read the constitution again and stop arguing in bad faith.

A distinction without a difference.

There are things that you can do with fear the government will respond to by using its power against you, and things you can do without that fear. Beyond that reality, it's just arbitrary labelling.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Seems more likely to me that He would make a picosecond evaluation of your entire life and the contents of your heart before coming to a decision.

And how do you know God is not a she? Or a he that identifies as a she or perhaps is non-binary?

 

[Bonesinium]

nearly every school child has at least read the Bill of Rights and/or Constitution

Lol. That's simply not even close to being true, sadly. You're optimism of the US education system is unfortunately unrealistic. I'm sure it's true for some districts or maybe even some states, but the US as a whole? Not a chance.

 

[Medicine Man]

Yep, pretty much how I see the great confiscation going down....

They’ll be grabbing our stuff while we’re out back arguing about God.

We don’t stand a chance.

 

[GML]

What about the deathbed conversion loophole?

Also, Jewish people don't really buy into the hell concept, so there's some ambiguity there also.

But if there's no hell, can there be a heaven? The lack of symmetry bothers me there, seems sort of lopsided.

Maybe it's just the same as being on Earth, where good and evil coexist in the same reality.

 

[daekken]

Lol. That's simply not even close to being true, sadly. You're optimism of the US education system is unfortunately unrealistic. I'm sure it's true for some districts or maybe even some states, but the US as a whole? Not a chance.

Even Commiefornia's standards includes mandatory study of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution no less than four times.
99% of Americans have never read it? Absolute BS. I'd invert your statement. There might be some private schools or crummy districts that don't teach it, but I'm sure the majority of Americans have encountered the Bill of Rights at least at some point. I'm not saying these kids are Constitutional scholars or could give you an in-depth explanation of the Bill of Rights but "read it at least once" is a pretty low bar to set.

I found four studies from the 80s that implied many students forgot or did not retain the information well, which I acknowledged in my previous post, but there is no way "99% of Americans" have never even read either document.

 

[hillman]

God: "Hey Moses, write this down. Thou Shall Not Kill.
Moses: "thou shall... wait, I can still keep my sword, right?"
God: "Hmmm... yeah sure. Makes sense."

 

[paul73]

"...THE right of the people..."

The word "the" is the most important word in 2A. The Constitution acknowledges "the right" as a natural right that you're inherently born with. It's not saying the Constitution is granting you the right. It's not saying militas only. Owning and bearing firearms is as innate as breathing air.

Our Founding Fathers won the bloodiest war in the west using firearms (not words, not knives, not love letters, GUNS). You bet they're going to put foundations in place to solidify firearm usage to keep evil in check.

Any “the right “ is only as good as its current interpretation by any current dominating tyranny. They do not deny it is your right, they only prevent you from being able to exercise it. “There is no necessity in that specific right today”.

 

[chuckules]

God: "Hey Moses, write this down. Thou Shall Not Kill murder.
Moses: "thou shall... wait, I can still keep my sword, right?"
God: "Hmmm... yeah sure. Makes sense."

FIFY

 

[paul73]

FIFY

it is a classic thing, by the way, how a 'murder' was replaced with 'kill' in there to pretty much revert the original hebrew meaning of not harming the innocent while still being able to protect you from the evil into a very convenient universal 'shalt not kill' as an absolute pacifistic surrender, accompanied with 'turn the other cheek' reference.

pretty much same exact hypocrisy that happened to the bill of rights, anyway.

 

[Saltydog]

Its a well known fact that God hates asymmetry!

So does Nature....

 

[wilson911]

I know that, it is the God of Abraham. What about all the other 4000+ religions in the world that do not worship that particular god?

But atheists don't believe in heaven or hell so I guess they go nowhere?

I think you are being naive. Everyone knows that the magic man in the sky swoops down and collects his followers on a comet and whisks them up into paradise. They all even get cool new Nike sneakers for their effort. Maybe hes the one that endows us with the right to carry man-made gizmos that shoot?

 

[wilson911]

Its a well known fact that God hates asymmetry!

Well, according to the Westboro Baptist Church, god hates something else too. Are they right about that?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Even Commiefornia's standards includes mandatory study of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution no less than four times.

Yes, but what do they teach? "Shall not be infringed" or "gives the government permission to arm its militias"?

But atheists don't believe in heaven or hell so I guess they go nowhere?

A logical fallacy many apply to religion is that believing in something causes it to be true. Religions that profess resurrection from the dead and/or a supreme being are objectively right or wrong, and either followers or athiests are wrong. For anything other than religion, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. "Faith" is like the psychic who cannot be tested to prove his/her/its powers because they do not work in the presence of skeptics.

The religious argument is like claiming Russells Teapot may actually be in orbit because skeptics have not proven it isn't.

 

[drgrant]

Even Commiefornia's standards includes mandatory study of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution no less than four times.
99% of Americans have never read it? Absolute BS. I'd invert your statement. There might be some private schools or crummy districts that don't teach it, but I'm sure the majority of Americans have encountered the Bill of Rights at least at some point. I'm not saying these kids are Constitutional scholars or could give you an in-depth explanation of the Bill of Rights but "read it at least once" is a pretty low bar to set.

I found four studies from the 80s that implied many students forgot or did not retain the information well, which I acknowledged in my previous post, but there is no way "99% of Americans" have never even read either document.

Of course you’re yelling about semantics without realizing that it’s basically a distinction without a difference. They may have read it at one time but I’d be surprised if more than 1% understand it more than in one small way it might be convenient for them....

 

[Chevy 2 65]

just wow

 

[hillman]

it is a classic thing, by the way, how a 'murder' was replaced with 'kill' in there to pretty much revert the original hebrew meaning of not harming the innocent while still being able to protect you from the evil into a very convenient universal 'shalt not kill' as an absolute pacifistic surrender, accompanied with 'turn the other cheek' reference.

pretty much same exact hypocrisy that happened to the bill of rights, anyway.

Thanks. I didn't know that.