Who believes the claim that the intent of the 2nd Amendment was to arm militias

Do you think the 10 Commandments belong in a courthouse?

 

If our rights are not inalienable and from our Creator as enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, then pray tell...from where do they come from?

It was the intent of the founders by way of our Bill of rights to guarantee that "government" insures us those rights. The godless likes to purport that we have rights because the government only allows it. No they are inalienable and should government try and shortchange us we have our 2nd amendment. That is exactly why it is there.

 

Yes
I do

 

Our rights come from thousands of years of human trial and error, until some reached a degree of enlightenment, and our forefathers accepted, and enhanced, that enlightened view in the formation of this Republic. This is what is handed down to us, and we must remain vigilant to make sure it continues. Both the enlightened manner of governance, and citizenship, we have inherited, and the trial and error that it took to reach this point, so we can continue to grow.

So, in my opinion our rights come neither from a creator, or from a government, but from we the people.

 

You do? You don't find that that threatens the establishment clause?

Establishment Clause
The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/establishment_clause

 

No, I don't.

 

Then what does it say? What is the "right of the people" in this Amendment?

 

Some of the "godless" accept that rights are inherent in mankind. The Framers had many discussions on divine vs natural rights, and in the end they decided that the origin doesn't matter.

 

Where do your rights come from if you live in North Korea? Those people have rights.....but the government infringes upon them. Their rights are unalienable and given to them at conception. I do not buy into your evolutionary notion. I think you would re-write the Declaration of Independence AND our Constitution along with the intent of which they were written.

 

I can't argue with that!

 

I don't care whether you buy into it or not, that is in fact what happened.

The people in the government infringe upon them.

I think you would place your religion over me. You already said your rights come from a creator. Well, guess what, mine don't, they come from me, and the other people willing to fight for them. We the people, not some abstract creator manufactured by men for their purpose.

 

your rights also come from the "people" that are willing to take them away from you....as in Korea. They are unalienable to those that believe in a force greater than themselves. You are at the whim of government. Government does not grant anything that it cannot take away. You would do well in The" Peoples" Republic of China

 

It's interesting to see the discussion about rights and their source.

If one really digs into it, rights spring from our existence as free people. Whether you believe in a supreme power in the universe or not, and regardless of what form you believe that power takes, the Founders' statement of "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." remains relevant.

Whether you believe you were created by God, Yahweh, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or the simple biological functions of reproduction on the part of your parents, you still had a creator. As such, you are "endowed" with those rights. They are yours, possessed by you, and no government can strip you of them. A government might infringe upon those rights, or a person can commit such vile offenses against the rights and sovereignty of others (through murder, for example) that they essentially surrender their own rights, but those rights are yours, and are preexisting of even the Constitution itself.

The Constitution is a bulwark of protection of people's rights; it does not create your rights. It places restraints upon government and how government can act towards you. One of the things that separates our Republic from being a pure democracy is that nothing - not even a voting majority - can strip people of their fundamental rights. Our laws protect the smallest minority there is: the individual citizen. Unfortunately, there are those who want to ignore the laws that protect the Minority, or even actively defy the protections of the Constitution to force their will on others.

 

And what good is god, or government, doing them? The only thing that's going to change the situation in NK is people. Enlightened people protecting themselves via laws.

 

If you are born prior to, beyond, without the protection of, a government, or set of laws, or constitutional apparatus, what rights do you have? You don't have any except what you're strong enough to enact yourself.

 

Does a child of age 3 have a right to life? Is a child of three able and willing to fight for their rights? Do they even have a clue as to what their rights are?

You are, in essence, arguing:
1. Only able-bodied adults have rights. What happens to the handicapped, the ill, the young, etc that are unable to fight for their rights? Do they have no rights?
2. the very same meme every homicidal dictator in recent history has argued - might makes right. The worldview of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Chavez, Idi Amin, Saddam, the Kims, etc.

 

Don't forget the Kardashians !

 

Those people....like you, believe they ARE enlightened. That is what happens when human nature is left to it's own devise. Actually, you are not that far off. It is what happens when people become gods unto themselves. Collectivism always denies the individual. The individual, I believe , is valued by God. He doesn't see us as a "collective". Of course you don't believe or accept Him.....that is your prerogative. It doesn't effect your value. Collectivism, whether it be pure Democracy or Communism, is like two wolves and one sheep, sitting at a table and voting on "what's for dinner"?

 

If the Second Amendment has anything to do with Arming the Military, and it does not,
Then the First Amendment grants freedom of speech only to the Military.

So only Government has freedom & liberty.

See how silly that sounds ????

Government does not need or have Rights, Government has Authority and Powers, only
"The People" have Rights.

 

I think you would impose your beliefs on me.

 

How very strange.
Either you believe in the Right to keep and bear Arms or you do not,
Which is it ?

 

What part of the south are you from? Texas, Arizona, NM?

 

Why do you think that?

 

Doesn't follow at all.

 

I'm from Alabama. How is this relevant? Nearly half the people in Massachusetts are Catholic.