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.
First time - teleprompter glitch, off script....yeah okay.
Second time - Hmmm, what the ****?
Third time - Time to answer to those who question why.
---
Perhaps he's just 'fundamentally transforming' our Declaration of Independence.
I wonder why he'd want or need to do that? Isn't it good enough for him?
I would agree with you about "fundamentally transforming" our Declaration of Independence. It is only the beginning of his fundamental transformation of our beloved documents from the days when Ben Franklin said we gave you a Republic, if you can keep it.
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".
No, its the right that wants to claim that there's some hidden agenda here.
I mean let's lay it all out there. Let's get to the core of the argument.
Why would someone be upset about this.
1) Because it is blasphemy toward "The Creator"
-But since we don't know what specific "Creator" is being referenced, that can hardly matter. If they meant the Christian God (or any other specific "God"), then the original DOI would have be exclusionary, so it can't be that....
2) That its disrespectful to the founding fathers.
-Of course wouldn't the founding fathers be the first ones to stand up and allow one to exercise their freedom of speech? Can't imaging they would get all bent out of shape over that.
3) Because what Obama is REALLY trying to say is that the government giveth, and the government taketh away.
-Well then why cite the Declaration of Independence at all? the ENTIRE DOCUMENT is about the rights of the people and overthrowing tyrannical governments and it is the contention of some that he is paraphrasing the Declaration as step one in his plan to abolish everything that it stands for?
Seriously, think about it...
No, what's going on here is Conservatives who hate Obama are pulling a "Political Correctness" game here without really designating who should be outraged or why specifically. Only that they should. So Obama doesn't say "Creator". Okay, let's riot..... But why are we rioting?
I would agree with you about "fundamentally transforming" our Declaration of Independence. It is only the beginning of his fundamental transformation of our beloved documents from the days when Ben Franklin said we gave you a Republic, if you can keep it.
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.
Examine the Constitution of the US and you will see the rights we are talking about here. They all extend from "Life Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness, among others" as listed in the DOI.
You cant be serious you have no idea what rights wer are discussing here, but if you are, just read the Constitution and come up to speed.
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.
Start ducking now and maybe you can avoid all those bullets.
And they are doing their best to do just that with the outstanding help of various kinds of atheists, deists and the like. Revisionists are waiting in the wings to get to work on that change.
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.
Well, honestly I think you're reading into it too much. Again, why cite the Declaration at all if it is your contention that the government bestows one's rights upon them?
If there's one document I wouldn't use to support that thesis it would be the DOI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
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.
Actually Jefferson couldn't have cared less about who anybody worshipped...
You think 100 years from now Crispus Attucks will be listed as General of the Continental Army and Karl Marx magically appears to become our first Secretary General?
No, its the right that wants to claim that there's some hidden agenda here.
I mean let's lay it all out there. Let's get to the core of the argument.
Why would someone be upset about this.
1) Because it is blasphemy toward "The Creator"
-But since we don't know what specific "Creator" is being referenced, that can hardly matter. If they meant the Christian God (or any other specific "God"), then the original DOI would have be exclusionary, so it can't be that....
2) That its disrespectful to the founding fathers.
-Of course wouldn't the founding fathers be the first ones to stand up and allow one to exercise their freedom of speech? Can't imaging they would get all bent out of shape over that.
3) Because what Obama is REALLY trying to say is that the government giveth, and the government taketh away.
-Well then why cite the Declaration of Independence at all? the ENTIRE DOCUMENT is about the rights of the people and overthrowing tyrannical governments and it is the contention of some that he is paraphrasing the Declaration as step one in his plan to abolish everything that it stands for?
Seriously, think about it...
No, what's going on here is Conservatives who hate Obama are pulling a "Political Correctness" game here without really designating who should be outraged or why specifically. Only that they should. So Obama doesn't say "Creator". Okay, let's riot..... But why are we rioting?
He is NOT paraphrasing the Constitution. He is using the exact sentence from the second paragraph but eliminates "by their creator".
I can't tell you why he is doing it, only he knows.. But it is a safe bet he doesn't want to admit that unalienable rights are endowed by our creator. He just can't bring himself to say it because he might not believe it. This is a normal logical conclusion otherwise he would use the full sentence in his quote.
So, if he doesn't believe that our rights are endowed by our creator, what does he believe? If he does believe in this, why does he eliminate it but go on to use the entire sentence before and after his omission?
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.
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.
