Bible Party of the USA

That's what rights are. They get redefined all the time.

Now people have the "right" to enter any store they wish, regardless of the owner. Some UN boob said the eskimoes have a right to live an unchanging life in a constantly changing world (referring to global warming).

Some boobs say that women have a "right" to kill their baby.

Rights are subjective.

Freedom ain't.

No... because generally, the owner of that fortress is the government.

They didn't teach me any of this.

They teach me socialist bull**** like "rights".

Rights are not subjective. The fact that judges are corrupt and people usurp the meaning of a word to suit their corrupt and perverted ideas does not mean the original meaning has changed, only the usage.

My paternal grandmother, upon seeing my father wear a pink shirt to a family gathering in the mid 60s said, "My, that's a gay shirt." Then she thought better of it and said, "Oh, I guess that word doesn't mean what it used to." No, it did mean the same thing. Someone decided to corrupt its meaning.

Understand?

No, in the first generation, the owner of that fortress is the biggest, baddest, most amoral, or evil person in the area.

Yeah.

And the government.

Tell me, what's the difference between a government and a king like Charlamagne?

You can't. Charlamagne was the government.

OK, I'll bite, where did you get your ideas?

Rights are "something to which a person is entitled".

While you think people are entitled to certain things, a Muslim would think they're entitled to other things.

Understand?

He was a man, not a government. That's why after his death, there was anarchy.

Rights are given by God to all people, regardless of their religion or politics.

You've just proven my point. AFTER his death there was anarchy? That means he was the government preventing anarchy, and once he died, being the government, anarchy ensued.

You never answered my question.

According to you.

And according to more leftist thinking, they're inherent to a person.

They. Are. Purely. Subjective. There is no definition that defines what the individual rights are.

You are getting the idea of a government and lack of external aggression or civil war confused.

A government endures when a person leaves the government. A government has a life of its own. It is not dependent on one man or a group of men or women.

A government consists of more than one person.

Do you believe in the Declaration of Independence?

There is no definition that defines what the individual rights are.

There are no individual rights, only responsabilities.

Do you believe in the Declaration of Independence?

Yes............

Any person is responsible for their actions, and the consequences of their actions, if everyone embraces and fullfills their responsabilities(that which you may be called upon to answer for) then we won't need "rights".

If so, then what are the unalienable things to which it alludes and why do you rail against God or the idea He conveyed those things on man?

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776.
THE UNANIMOUS DECLARATION of the thirteen united STATES OF AMERICA, WHEN in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.