• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you Believe?

Do you believe in these ideals and how highly do you hold them?


  • Total voters
    20
  • Poll closed .

kamino

Active member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
320
Reaction score
79
Location
Silverdale, Wa.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Ok so I am just wondering how many Americans hold these beliefs in the highest regard?

Declaration Of independence

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, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
 
No, I do not believe in them.

1- I do not believe that all men are created equal. This is not only not self-evident, but all available evidence is quite clearly to the contrary. No two men are equal in their strengths, in their desires, or in their potential-- and this dissimilarity exists from the moment of their creation to the moment of their destruction.

Thus to claim that all men are equal in moral value is to say that moral value has no relationship with any other measure of value; in other words, it is to declare that moral value is utterly meaningless.

2- I do not believe that men are endowed with rights, by their Creator or otherwise. Men are endowed with power, and it is by their power that they may secure rights; the more power a man wields, the more rights he may secure for himself. A man's rights exist in proportion to his power, relative to other mens' desire to exercise their power against him.

3- I believe that government exists as an expression of power, and thus it is not instituted for any purpose save that which powerful men put it to. And, again, every man's right to alter or abolish the government he is subject to is strictly a function of his power to do so.

4- The only point that I will agree with. Men are far more inclined to tolerate familiar tyranny, so long as it is bearable, than they are to seek an unfamiliar freedom from it. People start or join in revolutions for one of two reasons: unbearable suffering or unrestrained ambition.

I make no moral distinction between the two.
 
No, I do not believe in them.

1- I do not believe that all men are created equal. This is not only not self-evident, but all available evidence is quite clearly to the contrary. No two men are equal in their strengths, in their desires, or in their potential-- and this dissimilarity exists from the moment of their creation to the moment of their destruction.

Thus to claim that all men are equal in moral value is to say that moral value has no relationship with any other measure of value; in other words, it is to declare that moral value is utterly meaningless.

2- I do not believe that men are endowed with rights, by their Creator or otherwise. Men are endowed with power, and it is by their power that they may secure rights; the more power a man wields, the more rights he may secure for himself. A man's rights exist in proportion to his power, relative to other mens' desire to exercise their power against him.

3- I believe that government exists as an expression of power, and thus it is not instituted for any purpose save that which powerful men put it to. And, again, every man's right to alter or abolish the government he is subject to is strictly a function of his power to do so.

4- The only point that I will agree with. Men are far more inclined to tolerate familiar tyranny, so long as it is bearable, than they are to seek an unfamiliar freedom from it. People start or join in revolutions for one of two reasons: unbearable suffering or unrestrained ambition.

I make no moral distinction between the two.

I think what the OP has written is the ideal and what you have written is the reality.

I especially like that last part "Men are far more inclined to tolerate familiar tyranny, so long as it is bearable, than they are to seek an unfamiliar freedom from it."

So true is that today that people don't even recognize that they live under it.
 
Yes, i was refering to the ideal not its actual practice. I do have hope though, that this may one day be us again. Hope, beign a pescience of what is and a deep seated belief of what can be.
 
I think what the OP has written is the ideal and what you have written is the reality.

I can't support an ideal that exists in direct contradiction to reality. There is no way to make men equal, and it would be undesirable even if it were possible. Any civilized society-- any functional society-- has men below to be commanded and men above to be obeyed. It is the struggle between men to determine which is which that drives all social and human progress.

To reject this natural opposition of interests is to condemn men to stagnation and decadence. Applied to the whole species, it is to condemn ourself to irrelevance.
 
I can't support an ideal that exists in direct contradiction to reality. There is no way to make men equal, and it would be undesirable even if it were possible. Any civilized society-- any functional society-- has men below to be commanded and men above to be obeyed. It is the struggle between men to determine which is which that drives all social and human progress.

To reject this natural opposition of interests is to condemn men to stagnation and decadence. Applied to the whole species, it is to condemn ourself to irrelevance.


These ideals must be read in there entirety, it does not mearly stop at "all men are created equal" but goes into saying how they are created equal by being "endowd by there creator with certain unailianble rights that among these are life liberty and pursuit of happieness" (property)
 
I can't support an ideal that exists in direct contradiction to reality. There is no way to make men equal, and it would be undesirable even if it were possible. Any civilized society-- any functional society-- has men below to be commanded and men above to be obeyed. It is the struggle between men to determine which is which that drives all social and human progress.

To reject this natural opposition of interests is to condemn men to stagnation and decadence. Applied to the whole species, it is to condemn ourself to irrelevance.

I actually agree with this.

I think it means equal access to opportunity and not equal in actual creation.
Some are born smarter, wiser, with better adaptability skills.
I think those individuals should be nurtured to lead.

I am not a supporter of democratic elections at all.
 
Yes, i was refering to the ideal not its actual practice. I do have hope though, that this may one day be us again. Hope, beign a pescience of what is and a deep seated belief of what can be.

I agree that everyone should be left to pursue what dreams they have as long as it does not infringe on anyone else, however, I will probably never agree that everyone should be allowed to make decisions on the direction our country should take.

Our country's founding principles were pretty spot on and have since been perverted.
 
These ideals must be read in there entirety, it does not mearly stop at "all men are created equal" but goes into saying how they are created equal by being "endowd by there creator with certain unailianble rights that among these are life liberty and pursuit of happieness" (property)

And not only have I already spoken out against the existence of these rights, but the Declaration of Independence itself contradicts the "unalienability" of those rights by claiming the right and the duty to establish a government. A government-- any government-- carries out its duties pretty much exclusively by depriving people of their lives, liberty and/or property.

That's how they fund their operations, that's how they enforce their laws, and that's how they defend their borders. Every possible action of government-- except the declaration of pointless resolutions-- is itself a violation of the principles which the Declaration of Independence proclaimed. The only thing that remains, then, is to determine the degree to which those rights shall be violated and for what purposes, and you cannot logically claim that you are violating a right for the purpose of protecting it.

And that leaves you playing my game again: men struggling over the power to secure rights for themselves and deny those same rights to others.
 
And that leaves you playing my game again: men struggling over the power to secure rights for themselves and deny those same rights to others.

If you are familiar with the Fountainhead, is this not Gail Wynand, the ultimate second hander ?

I guess I don't see freedom in your equation.

I don't mean some idealistic pablum, but the literal freedom to go your own way and just not care what others think, to not need power over them.

I realize not every human makes every single thing he needs, but then I don't feel that voluntary barter necessitates much of this control either.
 
And not only have I already spoken out against the existence of these rights, but the Declaration of Independence itself contradicts the "unalienability" of those rights by claiming the right and the duty to establish a government. A government-- any government-- carries out its duties pretty much exclusively by depriving people of their lives, liberty and/or property.

That's how they fund their operations, that's how they enforce their laws, and that's how they defend their borders. Every possible action of government-- except the declaration of pointless resolutions-- is itself a violation of the principles which the Declaration of Independence proclaimed. The only thing that remains, then, is to determine the degree to which those rights shall be violated and for what purposes, and you cannot logically claim that you are violating a right for the purpose of protecting it.

And that leaves you playing my game again: men struggling over the power to secure rights for themselves and deny those same rights to others.

I am sorry, but I still disagree, I truly believe that all mankind, regardless of physical or mental problems are all created equal by there creator, regardless who that may be (God, Allah, Mother nature) in that they have the natural rights of to life (the desire to want to live) Liberty (the desire to live freely) and pursuit of happieness, what every that may be. While yes the very exsistance of Government can be an infringment upon those ideals, I believe that ultimatly the people can have power over there government and ensure that these ideals are protected. When government becomes destructive to these ideals then that government must be changed.
 
Ok so I am just wondering how many Americans hold these beliefs in the highest regard?

Declaration Of independence

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, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Do you not think they are still in use today?
 
Yes, I believe, in every single letter of that statement....and these...

288774304_da192e9c3e.jpg


samuel_whittemore-2005.06.16-18.29.48.jpg


And this. If you've never had the chance to visit the green at Lexington where the first battle of the revolutionary war was fought, you should.
 
I guess I don't see freedom in your equation.

There isn't any, unless you have the power to take it. That's my point. And wishing it otherwise does not change it-- you're either strong enough that treading on you isn't in anyone's best interests, or you get trampled. If you value your freedom, you have to play the game. You either have to be a player, or you have to find a master whose rules you find tolerable enough to protect you from the others.

That's what the liberals wanted government to be, but they forgot that people don't want freedom; masters prefer power to freedom, and slaves prefer security. So the corporations became law unto themselves, and the government adjusted its focus to service them, and special interest politics became the rule of the day.

I realize not every human makes every single thing he needs, but then I don't feel that voluntary barter necessitates much of this control either.

Voluntary barter doesn't necessitate this control... but it is one means by which people can gain such control. Most people do not require force to control them, because most people prefer to be controlled in the first place. It's only people for whom the system does not provide security, and people who desire power by any means, who must be controlled by force-- and until there's a critical mass of them to overthrow government, they are rightly regarded as criminals and kept from organizing and amassing power.

That's why liberal revolutions fail. They're a natural magnet for people like that.
 
I believe there desire are in use, however there practice is disapearing due to extreamists on bothsides, an example of this would be the whole craigs list thing or our current tax system, or the 14th amendment or the change of control of the military from the states to the federal government or publically spanking your children. We have allowed the extreamists to ultimatly control how we live.
 
It's only people for whom the system does not provide security, and people who desire power by any means, who must be controlled by force-- and until there's a critical mass of them to overthrow government, they are rightly regarded as criminals and kept from organizing and amassing power.

That's why liberal revolutions fail. They're a natural magnet for people like that.

How does the revolutionary war fit into your truly unique spin on history?
 
How does the revolutionary war fit into your truly unique spin on history?

Around ten years before our "liberal" government used armed force to suppress a tax rebellion similar to the one the Revolutionaries fought, ninety years before they used conscription to abolish slavery, one hundred and seventy years before "premature anti-fascism" was used as an excuse to destroy peoples' lives and livelihoods, and two hundred and thirty years before this thread was started.
 
Around ten years before our "liberal" government used armed force to suppress a tax rebellion similar to the one the Revolutionaries fought, ninety years before they used conscription to abolish slavery, one hundred and seventy years before "premature anti-fascism" was used as an excuse to destroy peoples' lives and livelihoods, and two hundred and thirty years before this thread was started.


You consider the founding fathers "liberals"?

That's...unique.
 
There isn't any, unless you have the power to take it. That's my point. And wishing it otherwise does not change it-- you're either strong enough that treading on you isn't in anyone's best interests, or you get trampled. If you value your freedom, you have to play the game. You either have to be a player, or you have to find a master whose rules you find tolerable enough to protect you from the others..

i actually agree with this. Violance is the supreme authority from which all other authority is derived. The has indeed been a shift in force from the people and states to the federal government.

That's what the liberals wanted government to be, but they forgot that people don't want freedom; masters prefer power to freedom, and slaves prefer security. So the corporations became law unto themselves, and the government adjusted its focus to service them, and special interest politics became the rule of the day.
.

I disagree on the point that people dont want to be free, am I myself not a contradiction to this? Yes there are people that do not care, but there are plenty who do.

they are rightly regarded as criminals and kept from organizing and amassing power.

Patriots will allways be called criminals, it takes courage to stand up for your beliefs. i am prepared to be declared a traitor or terrorist or criminal in there deffense. Even knowing that I would stand a very good chance of being arested/killed by my own brethren, I will continue to hold true to those beliefs.
 
I believe there desire are in use, however there practice is disapearing due to extreamists on bothsides, an example of this would be the whole craigs list thing or our current tax system, or the 14th amendment or the change of control of the military from the states to the federal government or publically spanking your children. We have allowed the extreamists to ultimatly control how we live.

That does not mean that the principles are no longer in practice. The text says:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

So as long as we allow it, the government is deriving its power from us. If we choose to unite and overthrow such an abusive government, then it shall be so. People will come to the point eventually and the extremists will be minimized.
 
You consider the founding fathers "liberals"?

That's...unique.

Well in the true meaning of liberalism yes I agree, but these current so called liberalists are nothing more then progressives, and those few true liberals left are dieing away. In the grander scale of the political spectrum yes the U.S. would be liberal, but conservatives within the U.S. political scale wish to secure those political liberalism that is the U.S. compared to the rest of the world. If the founding fathers were conservatives they would have been loyalists not patriots.
 
Ok so I am just wondering how many Americans hold these beliefs in the highest regard?

Declaration Of independence

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, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

I'm an atheist, so I don't think things were granted via some god, but rather rights and liberties are innate to all humans. Humans are equal, even if not treated as such; we all have the same base rights. Beyond those thing, the rest is right on. It is the right of the people to establish for themselves a government which governs by the rights and liberties of its people. Should a government act against those rights and liberties for too long, it is the duty and responsibility of the People, as freemen and owners of the government, to do away with that government and construct for themselves a new one which rules by the rights of the individual. 100% true then and today and something which should be well understood by all. The People are the source of all power of government. Should government abuse and misuse the People's power for too long, it is necessary for the People to do away with that government. It is our right, it is our duty, for the preservation of freedom and liberty and for the ideals this Republic were founded on.
 
If the founding fathers were conservatives they would have been loyalists not patriots.

EXACTLY.

It is my contention that the term liberal is currently being misused...by many. True liberals are ALWAYS in favor of human rights, and understand that liberty must constantly be refreshed by the blood of patriots in order to be protected.

I'm thinking JFK, versus the watered down version of today.
 
You consider the founding fathers "liberals"?

That's...unique.

The founders were for the most part classical liberals. An ideology borrowed heavily from by modern libertarianism.
 
I'm an atheist, so I don't think things were granted via some god, but rather rights and liberties are innate to all humans. Humans are equal, even if not treated as such; we all have the same base rights. Beyond those thing, the rest is right on. It is the right of the people to establish for themselves a government which governs by the rights and liberties of its people. Should a government act against those rights and liberties for too long, it is the duty and responsibility of the People, as freemen and owners of the government, to do away with that government and construct for themselves a new one which rules by the rights of the individual. 100% true then and today and something which should be well understood by all. The People are the source of all power of government. Should government abuse and misuse the People's power for too long, it is necessary for the People to do away with that government. It is our right, it is our duty, for the preservation of freedom and liberty and for the ideals this Republic were founded on.

I love you lol
 
Back
Top Bottom