Who knew that Col Alan West was a Vol alum?

#51
#51
He speaks in extremes with his analogies, but he is a great man and at least uses sound reasoning to back up his analogies. Granted, most don't hear his reasoning because they stop at the crazy analogy. While I think he limits himself extremely by going overboard with his analogies, I definitely recommend hearing him speak. I remember last year when he spoke in front of a focus group. They had a negative view of him coming in, but the overwhelming majority (both democrats and republicans) came away very impressed.
 
#52
#52
He speaks in extremes with his analogies, but he is a great man and at least uses sound reasoning to back up his analogies. Granted, most don't hear his reasoning because they stop at the crazy analogy. While I think he limits himself extremely by going overboard with his analogies, I definitely recommend hearing him speak. I remember last year when he spoke in front of a focus group. They had a negative view of him coming in, but the overwhelming majority (both democrats and republicans) came away very impressed.

He regularly says things that demonstrate a clear lack of knowledge of the foundation of the republic and some pretty strong indicators that he does not believe in liberty for all people.
 
#54
#54
Natural law. Closer to Locke in the essence of the state of the individual.

Yeah. Problem is that everything is relative and humans are social by nature. Those two tenets throw a kink into natural law theory.
 
#55
#55
Yeah. Problem is that everything is relative and humans are social by nature. Those two tenets throw a kink into natural law theory.

Social yes, but selfish. To some degree there is a natural yearning for independence.
 
#56
#56
Social yes, but selfish. To some degree there is a natural yearning for independence.

Yes, but humans cannot be independent. There in lies the problem. Humans have to be social to survive; yet they are inherently selfish. It leads to all sorts of dilemmas. Hence the rise of social contracts.
 
#57
#57
But you believe certain rights are unalienable, right? Where does it matter where they come from if you both believe they can't be taken away?

Franklin and Jefferson differed on the origin of rights, at least about the wording in the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson first favored the assertion that rights are bestowed by God, but Franklin reminded him that oppressive European kings had ruled for centuries by claiming so-called Divine Right. Franklin argued for claiming rights by their own merits, an expression and assertion of the people. Both favored religious freedom with separation of church and state, a position argued by certain churches at that time, Baptist I think. Jefferson eventually accepted Franklin's thinking, that free people claim rights as intrinsic to our nature.
 
#59
#59
West kicked off his fiery speech by saying, “once upon a time people would say Republican, Jewish, and black conservatives were oxymorons and we didn’t exist. Well I’m here to tell you that we exist and we are not going away!”




That's just awesome. On so many levels.
 
#60
#60
Yes, but humans cannot be independent. There in lies the problem. Humans have to be social to survive; yet they are inherently selfish. It leads to all sorts of dilemmas. Hence the rise of social contracts.

My point in all of this: there is a natural yearning within the "human spirit" for individual freedom. I think that it is part of Natural Law. Rather than calling this "Rights endowed by their creator" how about we just "Rights which satisfy the natural yearning of the individual".
 
#61
#61
He regularly says things that demonstrate a clear lack of knowledge of the foundation of the republic and some pretty strong indicators that he does not believe in liberty for all people.

Your discription fits Barack Obama far better than it fits Alan West.
 

VN Store



Back
Top