How to maintain your freedom

[muggsy]

Never trust anyone who doesn't trust you to own a gun and exercise your right to vote.

[DKD]

I would agree and add that extends to anyone that gets in the way of af any of our God Given Rights. The intened purpose of the second ammendment was to guarantee all of the others. If you don't beleive this go check out what George Washington had to say about the second ammendment.

[muggsy]

I would agree and add that extends to anyone that gets in the way of af any of our God Given Rights. The intened purpose of the second ammendment was to guarantee all of the others. If you don't beleive this go check out what George Washington had to say about the second ammendment.

Been there, done that. George was spot on. The second amendment is the right that safe guards all others.

[Zukoda]

I would agree and add that extends to anyone that gets in the way of af any of our God Given Rights. The intened purpose of the second ammendment was to guarantee all of the others. If you don't beleive this go check out what George Washington had to say about the second ammendment.

I will probably get flamed for this and I am NOT saying we shouldn't have the right to bear arms...

That said, it is not a GOD given right, it is a right given by the leaders of our country over 200 years ago... GOD had nothing to do with it...

Just saying...

[mr surveyor]

I will probably get flamed for this and I am NOT saying we shouldn't have the right to bear arms...

That said, it is not a GOD given right, it is a right given by the leaders of our country over 200 years ago... GOD had nothing to do with it...

Just saying...



you, sir, have a lot of learning to do.

Rights are NOT granted or gifted by the sovereign, they are "recognized".

Our forefathers recognized that these "rights" were pre-existant to mankind through the will of the Almighty.

[Zukoda]

you, sir, have a lot of learning to do.

Rights are NOT granted or gifted by the sovereign, they are "recognized".

Our forefathers recognized that these "rights" were pre-existant to mankind through the will of the Almighty.

Um... OK...

Care to quote a biblical reference that says I can own a gun?

Again, I'm not disagreeing with our right to bear arms... I wouldn't give up my gun for anything... I'm just saying GOD had nothing to do with it... If he did, wouldn't more churches support our "God given right" ??

[Zukoda]

and yes, I'm tired and argumentative tonight...

:)

[mr surveyor]

I could quote you scripture, but will refrain.

I would suggest that you actually read the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers.

[chrish]

It was not 'given' to us by any man. It was understood to exist outside of the realm of anything man driven. Everything in the Bill of Rights was for the purpose of enumerating the rights we had that the government was not allowed to touch. So to say it was a right given to us by the Consitution goes against the very reason it was enumerated. We had the right, it already exists. But as suggested, go read the Federalist papers for insight into the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. As for scripture, there are a number of passages, but Jesus himself indicated that self defense when you had to travel where theives were likely to do you harm was appropriate and a sword was in order. Second, Old Testament law was specific on self defense in the home and did not permit you to track down an intruder that stole from you w/ the purpose to murder him, but if you were intruded on during the night (meaning when you were home) you had the right to kill them in self defense. Scripture, as always, is very clear on all subjects.

[MuchoUno]

If politicians can grant rights, politicians can take them away. The Constitution recognizes/acknowledges the fact that we have inherent rights as human beings. Once you grant that authority to man, you may as well concede your freedoms.

[chrish]

If politicians can grant rights, politicians can take them away. The Constitution recognizes/acknowledges the fact that we have inherent rights as human beings. Once you grant that authority to man, you may as well concede your freedoms.

Which is the whole problem in a nutshell today. Our founding fathers, at least the ones that pushed to NOT include a Bill of Rights felt that ultimately, government would see those as right granted by said government and would eventually, through a natural process of getting too big for it's britches, begin to widdle away at those rights in order to stay in power and continue to increase in power.

Sound familiar!

[Zukoda]

It was not 'given' to us by any man. It was understood to exist outside of the realm of anything man driven. Everything in the Bill of Rights was for the purpose of enumerating the rights we had that the government was not allowed to touch. So to say it was a right given to us by the Consitution goes against the very reason it was enumerated. We had the right, it already exists. But as suggested, go read the Federalist papers for insight into the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. As for scripture, there are a number of passages, but Jesus himself indicated that self defense when you had to travel where theives were likely to do you harm was appropriate and a sword was in order. Second, Old Testament law was specific on self defense in the home and did not permit you to track down an intruder that stole from you w/ the purpose to murder him, but if you were intruded on during the night (meaning when you were home) you had the right to kill them in self defense. Scripture, as always, is very clear on all subjects.

So... papers written by MEN (Federalist, Bill of Rights, Constitution) mean that GOD says I can own a gun?

As for the Old Testament - as I read it, I can defend myself. Doesn't say I can own a gun to do so... Guns were not even THOUGHT about in biblical times so how can you claim the scriptures gives me the right to own a firearm?

Again - I believe I have the right to own guns. No questioning that. Just think some people read way too much into the Bible and Scriptures to make them fit whatever personal agenda they have...

I'm out... Have a good night...

[mr surveyor]

maybe you should just sell your coat and buy a sword, and be done with it;)


edit.... I mean sell your cloak. Must use exact wording I suppose.

[chrish]

Zukoda, your logic falls apart w/ what you believe and what things written by men allow, do not allow, and what those documents put forth as things endowed by our Creator (God or whatever/whoeover you worship). Not going to have that level of a religious discussion.

But where your logic, from a pure logic, falls apart is your very statement made twice. You said...'I believe I have the right to own guns'. From where do you get that belief. From men? From yourself? Well, unless those men, or you, are the authority on what people can and cannot do, then your logic fails. If that right comes from a higher order, then the whim of men, or you, are not at play.

Not talking down to you, not trying to be beligerent, just seems you are not on the same page. To each his own I suppose. But I would hope that if you think about the logical end result of your thought process, it won't make sense. You can't believe you have a 'right' if you get it from men. That implies men decide what is right and wrong, what is and is not allowed, and therefore subject to popular vote, government control, or the like and can therefore be taken away the same way. Which then completely blows your 'belief that you have the right to own a gun'.

Make sense?

Just sayin'...

I think you take the literal scripture thing a bit too far. I mean, how far do you want to go w/ that. Yea, buy a sword instead, but what kind of a sword. Only the kind that existed during the biblical era in question, a Roman soldier sword maybe. Or could you bend that and get a sword carried by a Civil War general? I think you'd agree, splitting hairs beyond the concept of self defense in scripture borders on silly?

[chrish]

maybe you should just sell your coat and buy a sword, and be done with it;)


edit.... I mean sell your cloak. Must use exact wording I suppose.

Never bring a sword (or a cloak) to a gun fight!

[mr surveyor]

do I have the right to own a bullet proof cloak?;)

[MuchoUno]

Which is the whole problem in a nutshell today. Our founding fathers, at least the ones that pushed to NOT include a Bill of Rights felt that ultimately, government would see those as right granted by said government and would eventually, through a natural process of getting too big for it's britches, begin to widdle away at those rights in order to stay in power and continue to increase in power.

Sound familiar!

Bingo. The Bill of Rights was the beginning of a very long and slippery slope. It was a necessary compromise, though, to get even this far.

[Zukoda]

I believe I have the right to own a gun simply because that is what I believe. I don't need man or God to tell me so... I believe I have the right to defend myself and my family and, in today's world, owning a gun is the best way to do so. If this were 50 years in the future, I may believe I have the right to own a phaser... 500 years ago I would have believed I had the right to own a club...

This "right" doesn't come from anything or anyone. It is simply something I (or maybe we) believe in. If someone wants to interpret the Bible to say they can own a gun, more power to them.

There are so many religions and different beliefs in the world that anyone who claims theirs is the ONLY WAY and that all others are WRONG or that they can or have to do something because a certain book tells them to... well, if helps you sleep at night, so be it... I for one believe that is what is wrong with the world and why we have so many problems... Too many people trying to impose their beliefs on others - all because some book says to... Oh well, I realize my thoughts and beliefs mean diddly-squat so...

Sorry if I ruffled any feathers...

G'nite...

[chrish]

So basically, you are just saying you don't believe in the Bible with respect to what you can or cannot do. Maybe you believe it for other things, maybe not. I guess you are comfortable w/ your position.

But again, I can't logically make the transition that you are evidently able to make. You just have the right to do what you (or we) believe. You aren't going to give up that right (as you said). So when you (or we) believe later that you don't have that right anymore, then we can just abolish that right and then you'll decide if you still believe it and melt your gun down or keep it in spite of the new law against it. I just have to think there is a higher power that gives me the right to own a gun than you or a group of people somewhere in DC. There are 300 million you's in this country, which one is right? Who and how many get to decide?

Again, the logic I just don't get, but OK.

You didn't ruffle my feathers. They are un-ruffle-able.

Fun discussion though, always enjoy seeing other folk's take on an issue...even when I totally don't get it and can't make sense of it.

[apheod]

Not being a Christian chickenhawk neocon is asking for an argument on this forum FYI.

[muggsy]

I will probably get flamed for this and I am NOT saying we shouldn't have the right to bear arms...

That said, it is not a GOD given right, it is a right given by the leaders of our country over 200 years ago... GOD had nothing to do with it...

Just saying...

Our government was founded on the principle that all power is derived from God and given to the people who bestow a portion of that power on the government. Our rights are inalienable because they are a gift from God. You need to study the constitution. And BTW this nation was based on Christian ethics contrary to Obama's belief.

[muggsy]

If politicians can grant rights, politicians can take them away. The Constitution recognizes/acknowledges the fact that we have inherent rights as human beings. Once you grant that authority to man, you may as well concede your freedoms.

Well said.

[Longitude Zero]

That said, it is not a GOD given right, it is a right given by the leaders of our country over 200 years ago... GOD had nothing to do with it...

WOW!!! Although God never mentioned firearms in the Bible the right of self defense IS a certainty and well spoken about in the Bible. Nobody with 2 or more living brains cells would argue against this position. As to your misbelief that rights flow from the leaders you are quite uneducated of our nations founding and the principals upon which it is moored.

Please take the time to educate your self by reading the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers. You might be surprise by what you learn.

[DKD]

I really hate to go here on this forum, but the degree of ignorance put forth previously uterly astounds me. They don't teach our children about our Constitution or the Bill of Rights. "We hold these truths to be self evident, that we are endowed by our creator with these inaliable rights" you get the picture. How in the hell can one misconstrue these facts, They are not up for discussion as they are above the rule of man. This is the very reason why it took until 1787 to adoubt and ratify the Constitution, several very smart ststes wisely wanted a guarantee which is "The Bill of Rights".
Wake up America....this is why we have that jackass and his chronies in Washington.

[JFootin]

I believe it is valid to substitute 'gun' for 'sword' in the bible. Both describe a lethal weapon. Has not the gun replaced the sword as the primary weapon used by men? It is a correct modernization that doesn't lose or change the meaning.

[chrish]

Not being a Christian chickenhawk neocon is asking for an argument on this forum FYI.

I'm assuming you didn't mean 'chickenhawk neocon' in a good way? :rolleyes:

[chrish]

several very smart ststes wisely wanted a guarantee which is "The Bill of Rights".

I agree it was an attempt to guarantee those rights that were understood to exists outside of man. But that's the rub, how has that worked out? Not too well I'd argue. Do I back and agree w/ the BOR, you betcha. But if you ask a large portion of the voting population or the government types, they'd tell you any ONE of those rights are not absolute and OK to limit legislatively or through the courts. It's has been going on since the day they were written. They want to censor what's on the airwaves, they want to restrict gun rights. The latest is forcing religious groups to behave a certain way. The list goes on.

My point is that I guess you can say they were 'smart' in demanding it. But the 'smarter' group IMO were the guys that didn't feel it necessary and said 'watch out, this is dangerous'. They were right, the 'smart' states were not, our perceived liberties were codified in the Bill of Rights and therefore up for legal debates and legislative action. That was not the intent, but it is what it is now. Removing them would be impossible now b/c of the case law surrounding each and every one of them.

But I would argue that the states and the pro-Bill-of-Rights crowd were warned at the time by people with a MUCH better understanding and vision of what would result. This is what they got for forcing the compromise.

[apheod]

I'm assuming you didn't mean 'chickenhawk neocon' in a good way? :rolleyes:

i dont think any less of the neocons than i do of the liberals, if that makes you feel any better.

:banplease:

[apheod]

www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf (http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf)

this is the neocons plan to build a global american empire in their own words.

are you trying to say this is in line with the principals this country was founded upon?

[DKD]

I do in fact have more than just a working understanding of our founding documents and the intent of said document by our foundering fathers. There will always be the few out there, who's intent is to misconstrue, liquidate, abscure, and rationalize ways around said documents to impose their understanding and tyranny upon the people.
To this end I thank my father for his teachings, a few of the good teachers that I had in school & college and for my extensive military training I received and to all those others I say "COME AND TAKE IT"!!

[chrish]

www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf (http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf)

this is the neocons plan to build a global american empire in their own words.

are you trying to say this is in line with the principals this country was founded upon?


absolutely not. but where on that site or in that PDF do you find this is the gun toting Christian position. You are the one that equated 'chickenhawk neocons' to those of us on this forum and elsewhere that evidently believe (according to you) that we should conquer the world in the name of Christianity. I guess you are one of those that think the crusades were an act of agression! mmm. Ok. All because some group of dolts put together a PDF of what they think we as a country should be doing does not imply this is the position of every gun toting Christian and in fact is probably not the view of ANY gun toting Christian. I can't think of one that I know that would necessarily agree w/ that document or the principles it endorses. Are there some good points in there, probably, but is the overarching idea OK, nope.


i also think you don't really know the definitition of a neocon or you are not correctly applying it. a gun toting christian is about as far from a neocon as possible. neocons are by definition OK w/ big government, don't see a problem w/ the expanse of government as long as that government marches forth to further that big government mentality. not exactly what anyone on this forum that considers themselves a gun toting christian would agree with i would have to guess.

so oh yea, you are WAY off base.


if you want to lump gun owners that are christians into a bucket w/ the big government conservatives that might CLAIM to be a christian and yet spend time inventing garbage like the patriot act, then OK.


there is a big jump between protecting american interests abroad and advocating huge government encroachment on our personal lives and huge government for the sake of maintaining huge government.

btw, name calling and insults are not an effective debate technique. usually better to back up your position than to generalize a bunch of people into a category and call them a name.

[chrish]

I do in fact have more than just a working understanding of our founding documents and the intent of said document by our foundering fathers. There will always be the few out there, who's intent is to misconstrue, liquidate, abscure, and rationalize ways around said documents to impose their understanding and tyranny upon the people.

I hope you didn't think I was implying you didn't. Not my intention. My point was only that there was a good reason some folks didn't want the Bill of Rights and it's my belief that their fears have come full circle.

Would it have been any different had they NOT included it we will never know, but I think it would be MUCH easier to defend and stop legislation since the dawn of this nation if the Constitution had been left in tact as written and only allowed the federal government to do those things that were enumerated and not allow them to do anything else. Maybe I just don't get the genius behind the anti-Federalists and the BoR.

[apheod]

I was certainly not lumping all gun owning Christians together, on most gun forums, the majority are in agreement with me on most subjects. On this particular forum, everytime I badmouth our foreign policy, war on terror, war on our rights, war on drugs, or similar topics, it seems like I get attacked by several who I would consider neo cons not really making any arguments other than calling me a liberal.

It's certainly not all or likely even the majority of this forum... But they sure are vocal and not shy about namecalling. And I'm not a liberal or an atheist by the way...

[chrish]

I was certainly not lumping all gun owning Christians together, on most gun forums, the majority are in agreement with me on most subjects. On this particular forum, everytime I badmouth our foreign policy, war on terror, war on our rights, war on drugs, or similar topics, it seems like I get attacked by several who I would consider neo cons not really making any arguments other than calling me a liberal.

It's certainly not all or likely even the majority of this forum... But they sure are vocal and not shy about namecalling. And I'm not a liberal or an atheist by the way...

Well I feel better ;)

I don't particularly concern myself w/ what anybody believes. You can be an atheist, christian, whatever. I just get spun up when I start feeling attacked from the standpoint of lumping groups of people together and generalizing belief systems and political positions. I understand now that was not your point. As a new visitor here, haven't gone back and read much of the political junk, but if you were attacked for holding those positions, that's too bad, name calling and personal attacks do noone any good and never result in a friendly debate.

This whole discussion started w/ questioning whether rights come from God vs just being there vs coming from men. I was merely responding to that debate and this was the result. I apologize as well if I was coming across beligerent or anything.

I personally cannot get to a logical result arguing either of the latter (rights from men or rights that are just 'there'), so I believe my rights come from somewhere outside of men or documents. From there, it naturally follows (to me) that something like the BoR left a big gaping hole you could drive a truck through. But that's just me.

This whole thread got me animated last night and I should have let it lie today. I have some pretty specific views that sit somewhere between traditional Republican and Libertarian, leaning toward Libertarian...and those don't always sit well w/ either side of that coin.

[apheod]

No harm, no foul. Politics can be a touchy subject, its easy to get worked up and have misunderstandings, especially online where you don't have the benefits of facial expressions and body language.

It sounds like you're actually pretty well in line with my politics ;)

[apheod]

And don't take what I said as slamming this forum as a whole, this is a great community for the most part, or I wouldn't have stuck around even though I own some Kahrs.

[Zukoda]

Wow - sorry if this turned sour...

I was thinking more on it last night and this morning. My conclusion, which I already know will not be well received here, is that what most call "rights" are nothing more than accepted social norms.

If you consider God as an almighty being, capable of all the things that are attributed to him, then my argument is this - the only "right" he has given us is the right to be conceived. Everything, and I do mean everything, after that is given to us either by nature or by man. If you consider it a "God given right" to live, than how do you explain murders? Surely, if God says I have the right to live, and he is all powerful, then he will protect my right to live and allow no harm to come to me. I mean really, how can a mere mortal take away a right granted by the almighty? Same with firearms. If it's a God given right as some have claimed, then we would not have a thing to worry about as that "right" would be protected by God himself.

I hate to tell you this, but man, or more to the point, society tells us what is our right and what it not. Where we live and how we are raised determines what we believe in and what actions we will take when faced with any given situation. What you or I believe is vastly different than, for example, what a Chinese man believes. There are lots more of them in the world, so does that mean they are right? They are in their minds and in their societies. It would take a very egotistical person to say that all those millions of Chinese people don't know anything and are wrong about how society should be. Does that mean we have to agree with them? No. Does that mean we have to change our lives to conform to their norms simply because we are out-numbered? No. What it does mean is that people need to pull their heads out and realize there are millions of ways to look at things and that chances are, many if not most, will be different than ours.

I have lived in different countries and have seen different perspectives on what "rights" a person has. It all boils down to whose house you are in and what their rules are. You can either follow their rules or you can leave. If you break their rules and try to stay there, don't be surprised when you get the punishment you probably deserve.

The same can be said for gun rights here in America. If the populace decides that guns are outlawed, we'll have a choice. Either follow the rules, break them and risk punishment, or leave. Just because you feel God has given you the right to bear arms doesn't mean you won't go to jail if it's illegal to do so.

Again, sorry if this caused any heartache - just find it interesting to see how others try and explain things like this...


---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=31.951516,-81.306667

[chrish]

Again, sorry if this caused any heartache - just find it interesting to see how others try and explain things like this...


No heartache for me, I'm good. I find these discussions enjoyable believe it or not. The positions some take, like yours, I find intriguing from a logical perspective. I also hope I haven't cause folks to loose sleep or all bent up.

I frequently point to a movie (probably a bad one historically at many levels, but the spirit is correct), but in the Patriot, many of the folks that banded together to fight were certainly not of the same belief system. I believe that was true of the groups that formed the militias and continental army at the time. Some of those folks were not at all religious, wanted freedom, probably hadn't given the first thought to where their rights came from or why and didn't care, they just wanted to be left alone to live their lives. Others most certainly felt a religious freedom aspect and fought both for their own freedom, their religion, etc, but because they felt an allegiance to God to stand for what was right. And those people NEVER (it seems from reading history) had the desire to force their religion on others. The founding of this country was very much live and let live and throw off oppression. That is not the case now. I would very much like to talk w/ someone about their religious beliefs, maybe even convince them of mine, but I'm not going to shove it down someone throat thru government regulations. I expect the same from liberals, athiests, muslims, etc. If you want to talk, let's talk. Otherwise, I'll stay out of your business and you stay out of mine.

They already took the good stuff out of Oreos and Lays potato chips. Now they tell me I have to buy the insurance they deem appropriate. They require me to announce to the world that I have a gun and carry it concealed. I have to pay postage to the same government that requires me to send in tax documents in that they require me to complete in the first place. My local government is part of Agenda 21 and might in the future monitor house by house energy and resource consumption. The list goes on. Government can no longer control itself, it is a vicious eater of freedom.

Funny (not really) where we've come now, on both sides of the aisle. Hatred runs deep and I want no part of it. I want to be free to live my life, not support societal mooches, raise and educate my family as I see fit, and defend it as needed.

[off soapbox]

I think I'm going to just go back to talking about 9mm vs .45

[mr surveyor]

what..... no .357 magnum????

[muggsy]

Patrick Henry
Ratifier of the U.S. Constitution

"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here."
--The Trumpet Voice of Freedom: Patrick Henry of Virginia--

"America is not a Christian Nation." Barack Hussein Obama

[muggsy]

"We are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. Among those are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Bill of Rights delineates some of those God given inalienable rights. Our rights do not come from the government, or from ourselves, but rather from almighty God.

[chrish]

what..... no .357 magnum????

Nice! :)

[melissa5]

Um... OK...

Care to quote a biblical reference that says I can own a gun?

Again, I'm not disagreeing with our right to bear arms... I wouldn't give up my gun for anything... I'm just saying GOD had nothing to do with it... If he did, wouldn't more churches support our "God given right" ??

Luke 22:36 ....and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

I'm loosely translating this to mean that everyone should have a weapon.

Dang! After reading the whole thread, I see that Mr. Surveyor beat me to the punch.

[mr surveyor]

melissa... I didn't go into detail in any of my responses for the simple reason that I finally reached the age to accept the old adage to "never have a battle of wits with the unarmed". ;)

surv

[Tinman507]

melissa... I didn't go into detail in any of my responses for the simple reason that I finally reached the age to accept the old adage to "never have a battle of wits with the unarmed". ;)

surv
+1 Sir!

[Zukoda]

Quite an assumption. Guess I should be offended but I'm not. One thing I've learned over the years is that people have their own opinions and will seldom, if ever, change them. I just don't understand how people can be so closed-minded as to not see that there are always other possibilities. If that's what it takes to let you sleep at night; so be it.

[Zukoda]

And Melissa. I believe that says a sword. You (a person) translated that into having a weapon. And others (people) translate that into owning a gun. Neither God nor the Bible say we have a right to own a gun. You just interpret it that way. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, I just want people to own up to the fact that it is their interpretation that says this and not God.

[Bawanna]

Well I think everyone now is well educated and knows exactly how to Maintain your Freedom. Let it ring.

Let's seal this in the halls of kahrtalk history for future generations and not let the door slam on my Richard.

We're done here.