If "Our Creator" endowed us with rights...

Creator is used with a capital C in the Declaration of Independence. It is synonymous with Divine Providence. According to Wikipedia:

"In theology, divine providence, or just providence, is God's intervention in the Universe. The term Divine Providence ... is also used as a title of God."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_providence

Where was the author of the Declaration of Independence's head at when he penned those words? In order to find that out, we look at what else he was working on during that time period. We find Jefferson working on the 1776 Virginia Constitution. Take a look at this section of that state's Constitution that Jefferson helped author:


"Sec. 16. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other."

If Christianity did not promote the concept of religious Freedom, those words would never have been put in the Virginia Constitution... AND note the use of the word Creator. Is your eyesight getting a little better now?

 

The fact remains that we got our rights as our constitution divided religion from governmnent - which is unlike ANY religious movement at the time favored.

Having the government espouse a religion and having religious freedom are two different directions.

Iran can't offer religious freedom. Israel can't offer religious freedom. Iraq was roughly secular under Husein, but it still couldn't offer religious freedom even within factions of Islam, even though Husein tried - and Iraq can't offer religious freedom today, either - their constitution denies that. At the time of our revolution, England couldn't offer religious freedom, Etc. Etc.

Religious freedom is a secular idea. The minute one says it comes from a certain religious system, it doesn't exist.

 

You are making your own interpretation. Equating Creator with divine providence.

IMO, the founders chose words very specifically and very carefully. If they meant god, they would have used the word god or God. Not 'their Creator'.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--

Notice that Rights, Life, Liberty, Happiness are all capitalized. Looks like capitalization is for annunciation of certain words.

I will go with the words as written. Creator v God. And not interpretate.

 

Jefferson believed in religious freedom and was prominent in Virginia government. Given the evidence, I doubt anyone will disagree with that. We know he and other prominent individuals did want there to be religious freedom in America. Look at the constitution, for example.

That's a MAJOR contrast with established Christianity. Puritans, an established Christian group, strongly believed in a governmnet centered in THEIR religion. They weren't willing to put up with the relatively small differences the Church of England represented in their view. They left England when they couldn't change the Church of England to conform to their beliefs. And, other colonies held the same attitude - about their own religions, of course.



Madison, the more major author of the constitution and a close partner with Jefferson did not take part in established religion and actively sought the disenfranchisement of the Anglican Church in Virginia. He was widely read and is not known for there being any intersection between whatever belief he might have had and his work as a major politician. In fact, history isn't clear on what his beliefs might have been - the guess is deist, but it isn't clear.

Unlike other established religion in America, Madison wanted religious freedom - as shown by the constitution which ensures a religion-neutral government in the only way possible.

 

So you arent seriously going to quote the gubmints surrogate religion that flies under commerce to me are you? ....and pretend its not a religion? Seriously?

 

There exists a concept of a creator. Whether you believe in it personally or not isn't relevant.

 

And one's creators are one's parents....so by being BORN we are ALL given "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.....

 

There exists a concept of:
Darth Vader
Bugs Bunny
Dracula
Popeye...

Doesn't mean they're real and doesn't mean the need to be worshipped. (OK maybe Bugs)

 

So don't think they are real than don't worship any of them.

I already said if you personally don't believe in it, it isn't relevant.

If rights come from government they aren't rights they are just privilege you get to enjoy as long as your government let's you.

Basically if there is nothing bigger than government, than government is god.

 

and that is a huge glaring distinction that statists distort.

I can take this a step further by pointing out the 14th usurped our rights and converted them to privileges, (as proven in spies and also a Utah case that doesnt pop into mind just now)

 

Your language usage is a bit difficult to follow.

But, if you think you have rights that come from your "creator."

Fly to Afghanistan and open yourself a nice Christian church.
See how well your "creator" protects your "rights."

 

The creator is mentioned as the source of rights not the protector of them. The protector is the Constitution, the people and the republic. I couldn't be protected by them outside of their jurisdiction.

 

Sigh...

Show me that in the Constitution.

 

Show you what in the Constitution? That it doesn't apply to the globe?

 

Show you what in the Constitution? That it doesn't apply in Afghanistan? Show me that it does?

 

That the source of rights is a "creator.'

 

That's not in the Constitution is in the declaration of independence.

 

The long hand version is, in conjunction with the BoR, and the perpetual memorialization of both.

The actual physical protection depends on an honest gubmint, but then how can we have an honest gubmint with a society of so many dishonest people that are elected to run the gubmint.

 

It's "Theophobia" or "Diophobia". Some atheists are so dead set on their denial of all things religious (even though the concept of a god isn't necessarily religious) they can't abide by any words like creator.

It's almost like an existential crisis. I was watching a podcast between Jordan Peterson and Joe Rogan last night. Joe is one of these type of atheists love him or hate him Peterson makes fantastic arguments for religious beliefs and God.

And Joe kept trying to get Peterson to renounce his views. He asked him how can an intelligent science minded person believe and Peterson explained.

 

All we got are privileges.

The only true right anyone has, is might.

Why does anyone thing any different?

Civil countries/states/cities, have laws that give those privileges meaning. Most like to call them rights, but they are simply privileges.

That's why USA has many and NK has near none.

If they are endowed by some god that is supposed to be the worlds god. He's failing on securing the rights this god has bestowed for its creation.
Why is that?

Also, per the bible, all gov'ts are granted by god.
ROMANS 13:1

KJ21
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but from God; the powers that be are ordained by God.

 

It is easy to demagogue this issue and kudos to you for being able to do so eloquently. That our Rights emanate from a Creator is unequivocally clear in the Declaration of Independence. That is followed up only weeks later by the Virginia Constitution of 1776. And the same man authored both documents. The Creator is a Christian God. That is the presuppositional thinking. Our Rights are bestowed upon us by a Creator and they had to be consistent with the beliefs of Christians. Christians simply do not recognize a variety of Gods - and especially one that is only in the Rights granting business.

"[You have Rights] antecedent to all earthly governments: Rights, that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; Rights, derived from the Great Legislator of the universe." John Adams, second president of the United States and a founding father.

The United States of America was founded on the principle that unalienable Rights do NOT come from the government.

 

You are now lying. It has gone from simple misinterpretations to outright lying. Many ministers of the period dare not speak His holy Name and used Divine Providence in place of God. That the man who authored the Declaration of Independence clearly and unequivocally identified Creator as being a Christian God in the 1776 Virginia Constitution only weeks after the ratification of the Declaration of Independence is beyond debate. We had men of faith that wanted to found a nation on biblical precepts (their world view of right and wrong) without offending one another and still acknowledging that our Rights were preexisting and bestowed upon us by a deity called a Creator. The definition provided of what divine providence refers to is not mine, so no sir I did not apply any private interpretation to the facts.

Annunciation only means the proclaiming of something and it is capitalized due to its importance. The word Creator is capitalized because it is being proclaimed as something of major importance. That we can demonstrate how important by the AUTHOR of the Declaration of Independence makes it even more relevant.

 

Our country IS religion neutral in that no denomination can force its doctrines through the legislature. At the same time, our system of government; our values that determine right from wrong; the way we judge our laws are all predicated upon Christianity. Furthermore, all of the signers of the Constitution agreed with the premise that our Rights are preexisting and do NOT come from government.

 

On this note we disagree. The J-Ws forced holocaust (a jewish ritual) by proxy to be taught in US schools as a matter of 'law'.
That is why we must look to the substance of 'religion', not the denomination title as is done now.

When one looks to the 'substance' of religion its crystal clear this country has, like neoatheists established its own branded religion and its getting worse by the day.

If we want to take a deity out of it, we can go back to the beginning when the king and freemen (allodial land owners) et al, made the first agreements, like here in the US it all started with voluntary 'joining the club' for protection et al, the people conrolled the contract, 'not' the king, later to be taken over by the king, which led to the revolution, and history is merely repeating itself. Those rights demanded over 1000 years ago by the people were never relinquished, and transferred to this country which was organized under uk law. If you look back in our own history people owned land in alod prior to da gubmint seizure through its operations of 'da lew'.

 

very simple, because all we can act upon is the privilege if we do not want to get shot. I know it sounds superficial, but its not, because it demonstrates the fact that we live in a kleptocracy, which does not diminish the fact that we have the rights, despite they are being oppressed by forces operating outside the law as it was written and agreed upon by all parties.