Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Monkey
So your evidence for the universal, objective, physical existence of rights is group consensus?"
|
No, consensus doesn't prove it. Our rights are self-evident. The consensus just proves that people recognize that our rights are self-evident.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Monkey
Axiomatic" by definition includes a lack of proof. The right to life is a good candidate for an axiom. An assumption around which the rules of a good society can be built.
|
False. Axiomatic means it's obvious and always true. It is self-evident and factual regardless of your denials. The right to life isn't an "assumption", it's a cold, hard, indisputable fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Monkey
But an assumption nonetheless.
|
Wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Monkey
Bullets go into skulls without regard for whether they are violating or enforcing rights. They do it with regard only to the subjective views of the wielder.
|
Bullets go through skulls when they are fired from a gun. A gun is a tool used to defend oneself when our rights are being violated, whether those rights are our right to life, our right to remain unmolested, our right to defend our property or family, etc. Our rights are unquestionable and even YOU claim to have a right to life so you agree with me whether you spew more mindless garbage or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Monkey
And, as you hold that the US government violates your rights, and you haven't shot any of them, I would posit that not only is that "measurable result" meaningless, it is nonexistent.
|
How do you know I haven't shot any of them, or that I won't in the future? I've also never said that a bullet through the skull is the ONLY measurable result.