God Given Rights

God Given Rights

The term, “God given rights” gets thrown around a lot, but just what does that really mean? First we must posit a god, or a natural system. This is a major step in the process of understanding. The theist believes that all things were created by an intelligent being who had reasons for the creation, and a plan that had a definite outcome. Since that being was the one and only, all rules, laws of physics, etc must have been absolute in that there was no minority vote. The creation of the universe was not a democracy, it was the will of an intelligent, cognizant being. Everything from the color of your eyes to the number of stars in the sky was set up, and preordained by this creative force.

Now, compare this with the view of the atheist. To the atheist the universe is the result of natural forces that have no will, no plan, and no emotion about the eventual outcome. There is no right, no wrong, just naked results. If the world is consumed by fire, or you win the lottery it means nothing. It is just the spin of the wheel, governed by rules that just came about for no reason. Goodness, mercy, and love do not come an intelligent design, but from the will of each person, directing his/her universe as they see fit. Right and wrong is subjective, and there is no absolute. There is always a formula, a “deal” for every event, for every choice and if the shoe doesn’t fit, just buy another pair. You change the formula.

I’m not going to launch into a great debate about the values of each of these mindsets. I am going to weigh the intent of the writers of the constitution in the light of the reasoning process that formed it. In spite of what some college professors may tell you, most, if not all of the framers of the constitution were theists. They followed various favors of the Christian faith. They believed that men were born with certain ingrained properties that could not be taken away. They called these properties “rights.” There’s that word; rights. People get confused by that word. A government, or king, or a Pope for that matter, cannot legislate a right. You cannot write a right, a right is a natural law of the universe, put in place by that above mentioned creator that cannot be altered or changed. When you attempt to do that you may impede the “right” but it is still,there. It never goes away.

The bill of rights does not grant rights, it only recognizes their existence and tries to put their existence down on paper. Just like you can’t see a black hole, you cannot understand them core natural laws that underlie each “right.” Take the second amendment. I won’t bore you with the vernacular, not because I don’t know it, but when you do that it always ends up reducing the discussion about commas, and the use, or misuse of words. What it boils down to is under the creation, all living things have a will set within them to live, and if need be, to stop other living creatures from destroying that life. More directly, if attacked, a human being may run, or pick up a rock, or a gun, and defend themselves. A dog will do that. A single celled entity will do that. Inanimate, or dead objects will not do that. If a comet approaches the earth the planet will do nothing to stop it, but any being on the earth with intelligence will try to save themselves or hide and run away, no matter how futile that may be.

By micro analyzing the second amendment you are just playing word games that have little or nothing to do with the underlying forces that the “right” is trying to describe. A being must defend that existence. The very idea that we must codify that simple fact is outlandish. To restrict the ability of beings to protect themselves is heinous. If you are hiding under your desk, with your illegal pistol while a madman meticulously shoots everyone he comes to, you will very quickly see the difference between man’s law, and God’s law. You will count bullets not commas.

All beings are endowed with this. They all have “rights.” The moment the sperm fertilizes the egg in a woman’s womb that being has a will to live, and no amount of legal maneuvering will diminish that. That instinct existed right from the big bang and you can’t change it. Other “rights” outline different aspects of existence, but they all stem from the core of the intent of of the creator that living beings want to keep on living. When you either stop a being from living without being attacked first, or you impede that being from defending itself
You commit murder. You pre-empt the will of the creative force that set all this up. You impeach God!

There will always be bad people in this world. There will always be people of good will that think by legislation they can rewrite the universal code. You can’t break the code, the code breaks you. You can’t change the way gravity works, and you can’t remove the survival instinct set into all living beings.

God given rights. God instituted these rules when He set off the creation, and you cannot thwart that plan. When Jesus said in the sermon on the mount that we couldn’t change one hair on our head He was right. Ask yourself, can we change the direction of one electron of one atom. The same rules that govern galaxies govern that atom, and it doesn’t matter if you believe Jesus was the son of God, or the son of a carpenter the song remains the same. He was right! That is the fundamental difference between Jesus and Mohammed. Jesus advocated a free people accepting the universe as it is, and Mohammed trying to make the universe as he thought it should be. Forget all the churches and mosques down through the years, just look at the men. When the Catholics burned people for eating meat on Friday they were just as wrong as Moslems stoning people for eating pork. Both impeached God!

Laws of the universe are of the creator. Call Him God, or Allah, or what whatever. Theology is man’s feeble attempt to explain the unexplainable and Rights are man’s feeble attempt to explain natural laws, and no matter how much you edit the prose of rights the master file remains the same and will never change.


NOTA Swims The River

There is a great fracture coming to the Libertarian Party. The absolute inability to form a cohesive unit at convention, and the members of the so-called SLEC proceeding onward through the fog shows a party in total disarray with no hope whatsoever of ever being a viable force in Texas politics. Swat them bees, swat them bees! Kathie Glass is a strong voice but the party just can’t seem to get it through it’s head that Gregg Abbott and Wendy Davis are not playing with us. They can’t see the forest for the trees.

There was a big movement to vote for some fella called NOTA, and I had some highly intelligent people try to explain to me about how NOTA was a real entity. After many points of order, and points of information I retired to the porch and had a point of Jim Beam. Good news was somebody else paid for the drinks. Bad news is Kathie squeaked by by the skin of her teeth while NOTA’s supporters searched the rest rooms feverishly for him. I think he caught the last train for the coast.

A considerable amount of time was spent trying to define borders. Ok, a border is a line where certain people stay on one side, and other people stay on the other. See, that’s why they’re called the “others.” Come to think of it I think NOTA swam the river. I heard we dropped off about 150 or so NOTA’s in Murrieta, California, much to their joy

Then there was this non-aggression thing. What that is consists of is while NOTA was a swimming said river the Libertarians were lined up on the far bank singing, ” Poka-dots and pink shoe laces!” Swat a few more bees. The end result is Kathie charging all over Texas in a bus trying to fulfill her obligation to the party while the SLEC runs behind her trying to let the air out of the tires at every Valero. Now please note I did NOT name any individuals. That’s because I want this to be a short article and I’m tired.

Keep Austin Weird!