• 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!

Charlize Theron Is An Idiot

jaeger19 said:
here is the irony.. I have explained it to you over and over... and you know what? You have had no rebuttal. You maam are the one that keeps trying to move the goal posts around and trying different arguments.

Kind of funny that you are critiquing my understanding of human biology and evolution since I have degrees in it. Which I have demonstrated.

Nope not really.

Based on the scientific evidence.. the evidence is clear that there is such a thing as natural rights. How we humans arrive at that is not known.. but the fact is.. the evidence is that belief originates not from LAWs or GOVERNMENT but from humans themselves. thus making it "natural".

that's not in any way a faulty belief in biological context. In fact.. I provided the evidence that several good studies show that our perceptions , our beliefs systems, etc.. have a genetic component and can be passed down. That's the scientific evidence.


At the end of the day.. you really can't get around the biological fact that rights don't come from laws, or from governments.. they start with the natural belief that humans have.

Its given us a biological advantage in cooperation the development of societies.
Click to expand...

Your explanations are wrong...they are not founded in science. They are not logically connected even tho you believe they are.


I have written it as many ways as possible. There is no such thing as 'naturally occuring inherent' rights. If there is, find the scientific discipline that proves it.

And not a soft science like sociology...'inherent' characteristics are physiological and can be expressed. Your studies didnt actually say that. Again...it's a limitation of your understanding of science.

I'm tired of writing it all. If you disagree, fine but you have not remotely proven that rights are 'natural' to humans. If they were, other animals would have them.
 
Lursa said:
Your explanations are wrong...they are not founded in science. They are not logically connected even tho you believe they are.
.
Click to expand...

Actually they are very much "founded" in science. I provided the science that supports my premise.

I have written it as many ways as possible. There is no such thing as 'naturally occuring inherent' rights. If there is, find the scientific discipline that proves it.
Click to expand...

I already provided the science that supports such a thing.

not to mention.. the fact that evidence shows that human beings developed such beliefs before developing diverse and complex societies.

And not a soft science like sociology...'inherent' characteristics are physiological and can be expressed.
Click to expand...

nothing soft at all about the science I provided.

but I will tell you what.. how about YOU provide the science that PROVES your point. Please. Provide the science that proves that there is no genetic influence on beliefs or attitudes or personality traits etc. Please show that there is no link between genetics and behavior..

I'm tired of writing it all. If you disagree, fine but you have not remotely proven that rights are 'natural' to humans. If they were, other animals would have them.
Click to expand...

Actually I am tired of trying to explain science and logic to you. I have provided more than enough evidence that rights are natural to humans and not the result of laws or government. Heck.. your OWN statements prove my point.

and the idea that "other animals would have them".. is classic lack of science. We don't know if other animals have them or not. We aren;t that knowledgeable yet. But.. 1. it is a fallacy to think that a particular species cannot have a unique characteristic

2. Plus in any case its a fallacy to conclude that you are correct.. when your only evidence is a lack of evidence.

Your argument is exactly like stating that the bible is how the world was created.. because I can't prove god doesn't exist. .
 
jaeger19 said:
because I can't prove god doesn't exist. .
Click to expand...

Our rights only exist because we thought them up...and then try to live by them and create an organization to protect and enforce them.

Much like religion.
 
Lursa said:
Our rights only exist because we thought them up...and then try to live by them and create an organization to protect and enforce them.

Much like religion.
Click to expand...

Yep.. thanks for ONCE AGAIN.. proving my premise correct.
 
jaeger19 said:
Yep.. thanks for ONCE AGAIN.. proving my premise correct.
Click to expand...
Nope...you just still dont understand it.

THere is nothing 'natural' about our rights...they are not intrinsic to Homo sapiens, they are not inherent.

They are a man-made concept.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom