U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-20-2010, 02:01 PM
 
Location: Blankity-blank!
11,449 posts, read 14,288,725 times
Reputation: 6904

Advertisements

The only reason that the Right insists on 'creator' here, 'creator' there, is because acknowledging a 'creator' gives them the power and authority to which they feel divinely entitled. If these people ever get a hold on power they will bring their vengeful wrath down brutally on everyone who isn't exactly like them.
They have others in their gunsights and are just drooling for the moment to press the trigger.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-20-2010, 02:06 PM
 
34,258 posts, read 41,302,530 times
Reputation: 29751
Quote:
Originally Posted by brien51 View Post
This is exactly what some in big government are doing, seeking to eliminate the rights endowed by our creator.

Government can't eliminate rights because you are born with them and endowed with them by the creator.
What rights are we talking about?
Way i see it you got the possibility of being born and the certainty of death sometime after,thats as close to rights your going to get in life from the creator.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 02:09 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,924 posts, read 28,159,110 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by brien51 View Post
It is also insulting to the Document and to others like me in the LP.

The "whomever" may be irrelevant but the term and the reference is most relevant to the second paragraph in the DOI. The signors were making it absoultely clear "rights were endowed by their creator" and that government's job was to protect and guarantee that "we the people" enjoyed that protection of our rights by the government being established.

You can't omit the use of the term "creator" and have the document carry the same meaning in the second paragraph. It leaves a giant hole in that second paragraph and would have everyone arguing over the origination of the rights of man. This is why the word creator was used in the document.

When one eliminates the word "Crerator" from the DOI, it implies that rights are not endowed by the creator, and that is simply wrong in the interpretation of the document.
You are so right but lets throw in the real thing Obama is aiming at. He wants people who don't know the Declaration and its introduction to not think about a Creator but to come to the conclusion that the government endowed us all with those rights. It is too obvious what he is doing when one considers the kind of people he has advising him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 02:09 PM
 
Location: NE CT
1,496 posts, read 2,905,805 times
Reputation: 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
The only reason that the Right insists on 'creator' here, 'creator' there, is because acknowledging a 'creator' gives them the power and authority to which they feel divinely entitled. If these people ever get a hold on power they will bring their vengeful wrath down brutally on everyone who isn't exactly like them.
They have others in their gunsights and are just drooling for the moment to press the trigger.

Balderdash. The words are in the DOI and Obama quotes the DOI's exact sentence word for word but omits "by their creator" purposely.

The only reason people here deny the truth is because they can't stand the fact that the very phrase that our unalienable rights come from a creator and not from government.

Obama's rethoric is the first step in eliminating the concept that rights are endowed from a creator and do not extend from government. This has nothing to do with divine entitlement except that it is written our right come from our creator and if you think the creator is divine, then so be it. No where in the DOI is the word "divine".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 02:11 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,924 posts, read 28,159,110 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
When 'one' eliminates the word "Creator" from the DOI, give us a holler.

THAT's something that HAS NOT happened in any way, shape, or form in what's cited in the OP.
Did you just say that Obama has NOT omitted the word Creator three times in speeches lately? If that is not what you said, just what did you say? You know, as well as I do, why he keeps doing that little trick.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Here and there
1,810 posts, read 3,603,271 times
Reputation: 2006
For this reason alone I would vote for him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 02:14 PM
 
6,561 posts, read 12,870,875 times
Reputation: 3165
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
More intellectual dishonesty from the poster above.

I never "claimed" to know Jefferson. However, I do read and I do study. I would never claim to be an "expert" and question the credibility any on CD who would.

At least the quotes I provided were directly relevant to the discussion at hand as to the relationship between the Creator and inalienable rights. Yours for the most part were only to support your claims of aethism and not specific to the document under discussion.
Uh, memo to ya. I wasn't the one saying Jefferson was an Atheist. Get your facts straight. They show that Jefferson was all about questioning God, his existence, and his role in human affairs, if he even has one (which Jefferson, as a Deist, believed he did not).

Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal
When Jefferson went to the effort to write in Creator and to further explain the importance of the role of the Creator in relationship to those inalienable rights it is dishonest to state otherwise, as have you.

Who's being disingenuous now? Read the document please. He hardly goes into any detail to further explain the role of any "creator". Total unabashed hogwash on your part. The Declaration goes on to address greivances with the King and there is no further mention of any "creator" or anything more specific mentioned.

"Creator" is mentioned once, and once only.

In fact, if any of you had bothered to notice, the FIRST paragraph states that the status of equality of men is derived from "The laws of nature and Nature's God".

So nature, God, Creator..... Fact is that we have unalienable rights.

Seriously, only a wingnut Conservative would take offense in the name of an innocuous "creator".

Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal
I understand that militant aethists will continue to mock. Go ahead. Repeating lies does not make them true. It is the responsibility of those who love liberty to dispell lies of those who would attempt to revise and distort our historical documents to suite a Socialist, Communist or Marxist statist agenda.
Mrs. Beck? That you?

For starters, I'm a Roman Catholic. Secondly, insisting that Jefferson meant something sacred with the word "creator" is just not possible. The word could not have been there to mean any specific creator due to the very nature of the constituency and their purpose for being in the New World in the first place... In which case the omission of the word should hardly be an insult. Unless, of course, you hate the man who's omitting the word.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 02:15 PM
 
29,988 posts, read 37,128,916 times
Reputation: 12760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
The only reason that the Right insists on 'creator' here, 'creator' there, is because acknowledging a 'creator' gives them the power and authority to which they feel divinely entitled. If these people ever get a hold on power they will bring their vengeful wrath down brutally on everyone who isn't exactly like them.
They have others in their gunsights and are just drooling for the moment to press the trigger.
Lies and Alinsky tactics of demonizing the opposition. Yawn..........

Words have meaning and accuracy is important. Consistant deviation from accuracy is not a coincidence, it is a pattern. All patterns originating with Obama the ideologue are worthy of inspection, including the repeated exclusions of the word "Creator" from The Declaration of Independence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 02:16 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,924 posts, read 28,159,110 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhett_Butler View Post
I just quoted you some of his writings that spell out that WHO the creator is/was is quite irrelevent to Jefferson.

He acknowledges a creator in the DOI, but again I ask you: Admittedly rights "bestowed upon us" by a creator would differ between the Christian God and the Muslim God. Irrefutable fact there.

So who is the Creator?

Depends who you ask. Jefferson is making an appeal to WHOMEVER YOU BELIEVE YOUR CREATOR TO BE that you have these rights. Who that creator specifically is is not relevent.

Again, who stands to be insulted? Christians? Muslims? Jews? Hindus?

No, again, the only people taking offense to Obama here are conservatives who will take offense to pretty much anything he does.

For one that claims to know Jefferson so well (though I suspect you're simply plucking quotes and I can name the site you plucked them from), I'd think you'd understand that he'd be rolling in his grave at the thought that people are more concerned about whether a "Creator" bestowed our human rights upon us than about the fact that we have those rights.

repeat quote:
I think that Jefferson would kick off all his dirt if he knew that some President of the United States was trying to throw out that word so the meaning of that bit of his writing would come to be the government endowed those rights on people. Jefferson was just as worried about government someday becoming as all powerful as Obama wants it to be as he was about who anybody worshiped.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2010, 02:19 PM
 
Location: NE CT
1,496 posts, read 2,905,805 times
Reputation: 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
Heard him say when and where he was QUOTING the DOCUMENT?

The OP has him referring to the 13 colonies, NOT the document.

.
This is also wrong since the DOI mentions the UNITED STATES:

Quote:
We, therefore,the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress Assembled appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Recititude of our Intentions...


The DOI never refers to "13 colonies". It does mention "these colonies" but in the end calls itself the "United States of America", as proved above.

It also reads "these United Colonies are, and Right ougt to be, Free and iIndependent States"

So does your exertise with TJ understand this part of the DOI?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:31 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top