In response to:

Orwellian: Great Britain to Establish “New Press Regulations”

Anonymous11607 Wrote: Mar 20, 2013 11:25 AM
Those who do not believe in God cannot fall back on claiming their rights are inviolable, because once God is removed from the equation, the rights to bestow life, liberty and the right to happiness; own property, etc. then become only those rights bestowed by other humans, who may or may not have the best interest of everyone else at heart. The U.S. has the Second Amendment to protect these God-given rights from men and women who do not agree that those rights come from a higher power.
Earl29 Wrote: Mar 20, 2013 11:34 AM
They can fall back on the knowledge that only human beings can believe in God. They can believe in natural human rights by virtue of your ability to believe in God. Whether endowed by our Creator or by our Creation, we have those rights because of our unique humanity.
DB07 Wrote: Mar 20, 2013 11:32 AM
With all respect for your religeous beliefs, "natural rights" are inalienable also.
DB07 Wrote: Mar 20, 2013 11:49 AM
Lots of people...it's certainly not a new concept that I came up with! The rights are the same whether held as God-given or given by virtue of our existence as humans.
Col Bat Guano Wrote: Mar 20, 2013 12:10 PM
You miss the point. Those humans who say you have certain natural rights can also take them away. Rights that are God given are beyond the power of any human to remove. Your position has been taken many times in human history and met brutal failure.
Michael1364 Wrote: Mar 20, 2013 12:12 PM
Earl29 Wrote: Mar 20, 2013 12:20 PM
Human rights can never be taken away; they can only be violated.
DB07 Wrote: Mar 20, 2013 12:22 PM
Not if the list of rights is the same. Now, if evil people exert power over you, they can effectively take away your rights. You still have them, but cannot exercize them. The rights have not changed, and yes this even happens to people who believe their rights are derived from God.
Col Bat Guano Wrote: Mar 20, 2013 12:37 PM
Then by what rhetorical basis can those so oppressed have any claim they have any rights at all that are being oppressed? The oppressor(s) may have equally rational arguments the plaintiffs are a minority faction whose beliefs/customs etc. are detrimental to society as a whole. The British parliament basically started the American Revolution with such a piece of Legislation called the Declaratory Act.

Those who scoff at conservatives who publicly acknowledge that tyrannical government is at least capable of infringing on American civil liberties need to look no further than what’s happening across the pond. Sadly, Great Britain’s political leaders have reportedly lost their spines, agreeing to stringent “new press regulations” without so much as a fight. These rules and guidelines will effectively end freedom of the press in the United Kingdom as we know it. Charles C.W. Cooke reports:

[L]ondon, once the undisputed center of the free world, has fallen to the dull charms of cheap censorship. For...