So, do you believe that: "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"

I personally don't see any proof of any Creator and I don't believe that people are born with any set of rights (unalienable or alienable).

My opinion is that no-one is born with any rights other than those they have in the country they were born in. There are those out there where you indeed have pretty much none. I don't hold my rights in any relationship to a "creator", my rights are determined by the law in my country and are limited to those. So: I cannot say that we are born with a set.

I agree with you, talking about it purely on a logical basis


If people SHOULD be born with them, regardless of a creator, that is a whole other matter.

I’m a liberal so I am meant to think so yet when I get down to asking the question with a cynical and ‘factual’ mind the answer I come up with is ‘No.’

Throughout history there have been periods where the ‘rights’ of a person have been addressed and one thing is interesting to note: These periods are always directly after a misused percentile of the population rise up and revolt in some way.

Doesn’t have to be a civil war or the likes but some political upheaval takes place and suddenly the government recognizes a certain ‘rights.’ If these rights where truly universal and given at birth there wouldn’t be a need to recognize them. Everyone would have them, and the idea of taking them away would be alien to us. People wouldn’t have to fight for what they all ready have and are not in a position to lose.

Do I think rights are a good thing: Hell yeah. The battles fought in the past where around ensuring the small and powerful class can’t exploit the more common yet weaker masses in some way. To ignore these battles are turning back the clock and so, by laws written and battles fought, we do have rights. Even if it wasn't some god that gave them to us, but our past kin who fought for them.

no, i don't believe that, but it's a nice sentiment.

something i've often wondered and considered: i think when it was written there had to be an understanding that this couldn't be proven or refuted, one way or the other. i think the idea was to have a set of core-type rights that shouldn't be changed regardless of the political current standards during any given time. to say that we are created equally and that we have creator-given rights that are unalienable and then to say that there should be a separation between church and state is a way to say that, in so many words.

Raven, please bear with me as somehow, I have no clue how, your posts are settling in marked as read.

At least I saw it now, and I have posted on the forumer forums about it, and have also been asking for a last few posts overview I can put on the front page.

So.. folks please pay attention to the posting times, you might miss a few posts left and right otherwise.

While I agree with the first part of the sentence I have doubts about the second. You can't (and shouldn't) support something that you consider good with false arguments.

ah, but i only said that i "wondered and considered" about my second statement.
just thinking and just sayin'...if things are "unalienable" because they're god-given and there is a separation of church and state, then those rights, in theory, shouldn't/couldn't be tampered with...if that were true and maybe that is what they might have in common, in my convoluted reasoning, but i did say that i thought it was a sentiment. meaning: i don't believe in it, but i guess this could be what others might believe in...
like i said, just thinking and just sayin'. i view it only as a possibility.

I don't believe people are born with certain rights.(except for the right to live when you've been born).
That people have the ability to evolve and grow.
(or choose not to, also a possibility ofcourse)
Therefor I don't agree with the Indian kaste system for instance, where people who have been born in the lowest kaste cannot learn and evolve and make something better of his/her life but is obliged to stay on that level.

Political rights which have been formed (and fought for) are a good thing, but they apply to us all, not just some of us.

Or isn't that what you mean?