• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trump is safe following shooting at Florida golf course; suspect detained

Ebionite

Ebionite

Well-Known Member
Kathryn said:
The shooter never got a shot off.
Click to expand...
Three shell casings were found on the scene, believed to be associated with the suspect's AK-47. However, sources said investigators are still evaluating whether the suspect discharged his weapon at the location.

abc7ny.com

Trump safe after apparent 'attempted assassination' at Florida golf club, sources ID detained man

The FBI is investigating what it called an "attempted assassination" of former President Donald Trump after Secret Service agents fired at a man with an AK-47 rifle on or near Trump's Palm Beach, Florida, golf course on Sunday.
abc7ny.com abc7ny.com


Stevicus said:
How are we defining these groups in question? Would all US citizens be considered part of a single group, or would they be grouped into sub-categories?
Click to expand...
In general, any criteria can be applied. U.S. citizens could be grouped into those who applied in writing, those who swore an oath of allegiance, and those who were deemed to be natural born citizens.

Stevicus said:
No basis in ethics? What makes you say that?
Click to expand...
Because human beings are defined by their relationship with the state, and that relationship doesn't have an basis in ethics. The origin of the term human (AFAIK) was with Cicero, who made a distinction between "civilized" humans and "barbaric" outsiders.

Stevicus said:
The Founding Fathers believed that people had certain inalienable rights endowed by their Creator. This belief led to the creation of what we refer to as the Bill of Rights, and the same basic concept was expanded upon and enhanced in later centuries, particularly after the Second World War when the Universal Declaration on Human Rights was signed by many nations.
Click to expand...
The U.S. Declaration of Independence predates the UDHR and draws from English common law for the meaning of the rights of life and liberty. The UDHR doesn't refer to a Creator.

Human rights (unlike natural rights) are conditional on the security policy of the state.

These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Click to expand...
www.un.org

Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations

A milestone document in the history of human rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights set out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected. It has been translated into over 500 languages.
www.un.org www.un.org

Stevicus said:
Of course, if there are governments which have no desire or intention of following these principles and moral guidelines, then all they have to do is say so. They can put it in writing.
Click to expand...
It's been put in writing an Article IX of the Anglican articles of Religion, which predates the U.S. Declaration of Independence. Article IX conflates men with persons with the context of the doctrine of original sin. The doctrine is inconsistent with the common law presumption of innocence.

Men (as created beings) have natural rights, but persons do not. In some jurisdictions persons are considered to be human beings (or corporations in the case of legal persons).

Stevicus said:
Yes, although the point was that slavery does not benefit a modern industrial society. It's like putting horses and carts on a superhighway.
Click to expand...
Slavery benefits society by not transferring the loss that led to a man becoming a slave to society in general. Economic loss is just as relevant in a modern society as it is in an ancient one.

Stevicus said:
The church can certainly have a role in encouraging and maintaining faith among the populace, and that faith is essential to a stable, orderly, law-abiding society.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, in some cases faith is inconsistent with the observance of the law.

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Galatians 2:16

Stevicus said:
You may have a point, but in the final analysis, the only thing we can look at is their performance and the results of their choices and actions.
Click to expand...
People have the ability to evaluate the honesty of a politician though non-verbal cues. Democracy is based on the communication of policies and ideals, if this communication is inconsistent then people have a basis for forming a strategy that opposes that politician.

Stevicus said:
I think we have a system which is far too forgiving and indulgent towards bureaucrats and civil servants when they fail to do their duty or use incredibly bad judgment. We've seen it happen with bad cops all too often, but it's not just with cops.
Click to expand...
This is why it's important for people to develop or exercise their ability to make good judgments.

Stevicus said:
Yes, ultimately, the voters are to blame for whom they elect, and along the same lines, most of the public tends to act like followers instead of leaders. If it's supposed to be a "government of the people," then "the people" have to be leaders, not followers. Among other things, it means they have to think clearly. Even if they might err and choose the wrong candidate at the polls, they still need to understand the issues and decide what they think is best for the country.
Click to expand...
Anybody can vote, it takes insight to be able to comment meaningfully about the issues.

Stevicus said:
Or maybe Proverbs 16:18.
Click to expand...
In this sense pride is related to ignorance (the humble are better able to recognise errors) Hosea 4:6.

Stevicus said:
I neither believe nor disbelieve.
Click to expand...
It's not realistic to hold definitive beliefs about these things, there's too much that we don't know. But OTOH it can be useful to have a working theory that can be amended as new facts turn up. The idea that advanced tech was acquired and kept from the public turns up quite a bit in the alternative discourse (Bob Lazar, David Grush).
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
anotherneil said:
It totally helps me, but it doesn't matter if it'll help me or not; it'll help the audience, and humanity in general.
Click to expand...
Then it appears that you are only fooling yourself. If you could be serious I would politely discuss this with you, but you seem to lack that ability here.
 
Pogo

Pogo

Well-Known Member
8319489_G_29398251_ver1.0.jpg
 
anotherneil

anotherneil

Well-Known Member
Subduction Zone said:
Then stick with it. You got mad because you were refuted and started this detour. You should have either supported your claims better or have acknowledged the refutations.
Click to expand...
I did not get refuted, and you're the one making this about me. I am now putting you on ignore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top