Does Liberty exist without God?

[Ian A.]

Jefferson wrote

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.

Tom wasn't pulling those words out of his ass when he wrote that. He was a brilliant philosopher who understood that without a Being (i.e. God) who transcends everything including space, matter, and time, then human beings have no "rights" at all. From an atheistic viewpoint "Rights" and "Morality" are just subjective beliefs. William Lane Craig lays out this argument here:


YouTube - Where do Objective Morals Originate in the Universe?

So despite our mods who placed this Religion forum in "Off-Topic," the truth is that without God, we have no justification to champion Liberty, and no reason to be on this forum.

Judge Napolitano's talks about this during this speech on this subject:

I have a couple of beliefs--firm beliefs that Jefferson called Truisms. A Truism is something that is so obvious that it doesn't have to be proven, and here they are:

1. The first of these Truisms is that God created every human being on the planet in his own image and likeness.

2. Because he is perfectly free, he has created us in a state of perfect freedom.

3. In order to protect those freedoms, and for no other purpose we have established a government, and the ONLY legitimate role of the Government is to protect human freedom.

4. Every individual has an immortal soul. Capable of glorifying God infinitely and Eternally. The Government is just an artificial organization based on fear and force. If you don't believe me, take the words of the first two American Presidents. George Washington said it was based on force, and John Adams said it was based on fear; I think they knew what they were talking about.

Now, there was a time when everybody in America believed all of this.

Tom Woods has just given us a brilliant and succinct analysis of how we lost these beliefs, and consequently lost the freedoms that the beliefs animated.

 

[hillbilly123069]

There is no existence without Him.And no salvation without Jesus.

 

[Andrew-Austin]

Now that you have these fine appeals to authority going, I'm just going to have to cast aside my trust in empiricism and reason over dated mysticism. Not.

I don't exactly have the energy to prove to you that religion does not have to have a monopoly over morality (and thus convert you to atheism), when you are already heavily engaged in seeing what you want to see and looking only for things that confirm your bias. For starters its not all that nice to selectively point to one atheist who casts aside the notion of morality, under the guise that he speaks for all atheists or knows better than all atheists. Why don't you look in to atheists who do posit that morality can be defined through reason, because they certainly exist. Stefan Molyneux for instance.

And you probably don't believe in religion just because you think it is the only answer to the morality question, rather you believed in your religion first (as it was embedded in you by culture and family) and then jumped to that conclusion as a way of justifying irrational belief.

Even if it were true that the idea of morality is just nonsense without a mystical omnipotent ghost endorsing it, I still wouldn't believe in the ghost-energy-skyman thing. Its by far the more ridiculous approach to philosophy, its basically a non-answer.

Person A: God says X is moral, and Y is immoral.

Person B: How do you know this is so?

Person A: Because God said so?

Person B: How do you know God exists?

Person A: The Bible says so, its say to believe.

Person B: Well who wrote the bible?

Person A: Well a bunch of mortals wrote the bible, but God got inside their heads and formed the words for them. (some bullshit answer like that)

Person B: Do you have any other reason to believe in God?

Person A: Well sometimes my prayers have come true, and sometimes I get this really joyful-vague-awe inspiring feeling when I think about and worship God.

Person B: Yes sometimes I hope for things and they coincidentally come true, and I'm pretty sure most people at times feel a sense of wonder when pondering the unknown, and when looking st the stars, etc.

---

We can try this same type of discussion over and over regarding the religious approach to morality and only achieve similar non-answers. You could just as well form a religion around Congress, and have every law they write be deemed morality, without debate or judgment as to why these laws must constitute morality. It would be doing the same thing. Replace God with Congress or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

 

[Kotin]

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...






(just trying to save everyone some time)

 

[BuddyRey]

Absolutely. Atheists enjoy the same intrinsic rights as theists. Rights are a product of the recognition of man's nature.

 

[Andrew-Austin]

I have a couple of beliefs--firm beliefs that Jefferson called Truisms. A Truism is something that is so obvious that it doesn't have to be proven, and here they are:

1. The first of these Truisms is that God created every human being on the planet in his own image and likeness.

2. Because he is perfectly free, he has created us in a state of perfect freedom.

3. In order to protect those freedoms, and for no other purpose we have established a government, and the ONLY legitimate role of the Government is to protect human freedom.

4. Every individual has an immortal soul. Capable of glorifying God infinitely and Eternally. The Government is just an artificial organization based on fear and force. If you don't believe me, take the words of the first two American Presidents. George Washington said it was based on force, and John Adams said it was based on fear; I think they knew what they were talking about.

Now, there was a time when everybody in America believed all of this.

Tom Woods has just given us a brilliant and succinct analysis of how we lost these beliefs, and consequently lost the freedoms that the beliefs animated.

1. lol, that isn't obvious at all.

2,3&4. So if God created us in a perfect state of freedom, what ever happened to that perfect state of freedom anyways? And why did this entity called government enter the picture if we were originally in a perfect state of freedom? Surely the creation of man preceded the creation of anything remotely similar to what modern nation states look like? You say that governments are artificial constructs, and that their only purpose is to protect liberty. But don't governments (as they are defined today, territorial monopolists of ultimate decision making and the right to use force) inherently have to violate people's freedoms just to exist?
So if God created humans and wished us to live in the nearest state to perfect liberty as possible, and then humans create governments that only erode liberty and by their very nature must violate liberty just to exist, isn't that going against God's will?

 

[Kludge]

Liberty can exist. Rights exist only as much as we secure others' belief in them (well... without some type of aggression involved, as Napolitano is advocating). There isn't really a "moral" argument for atheists regarding why we ought to have rights other than it removes a lot of problems from social interaction by divvying out who owns what absolutely.

Even if rights as Christians believe were to exist, that'd still only give them "moral authority" to secure their rights and not the essential might to enforce their will (or His will) here now.

Protecting freedoms (creating and securing rights) is itself an attack on our liberties. Therefor, if Christians were to claim that, as a "Truism" and something all Christians should take on faith, gov't ought to exist, and that it should exist to secure rights, then I would argue that liberty cannot exist with Christians' beliefs of God. Or, liberty cannot exist with God (and Napolitano's "Truisms").

 

[emazur]

Do not do onto others as what you would not have them do onto you. That is liberty. I don't need a god to tell me it's immoral to steal because I wouldn't want anyone stealing from me. Parents could pass on this philosophy on to their children (who may be tempted to do things they shouldn't when they have yet to experience a particular action being done onto them) without religion being involved.

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."
- Thomas Jefferson

 

[damon04]

Whether or not you believe God's existence, it comes down to this: Having God included as the one true universal being that bestows the natural rights, the Bill of Rights. It was meant to say that NO man posses the ability to strip them away. That is the perfect plan for such logical and reasonable people as our founders were.

 

[Baptist]

I always tell people that even if you don't believe in God, it's important to state that we get our rights from Him. Why? Because what man gives man can take away. No man and no government can take away my rights, because I get them from God.

Myself, I'd rather live in any society where the government recognizes a higher power (even if only in lip service), than one that does not. I would rather live in a Jewish Israel than China, Cuba, U.S.S.R or North Korea. I'd rather live in Islamic Iran or Turkey, than the godless communist countries.

As far as the irrational argument goes... the reason I got back into church was because I started pursing a degree in biology and the sciences. Taking science classes reminded me of what I already knew: that we didn't come from primordial balls of ooze.

 

[muzzled dogg]

well then your god must not exist cause i can't get any liberty for shit

 

[tonesforjonesbones]

God / Jesus is the Great Libertarian...advocate for free will. This society has definately gone to the toilet since God became passe. tones

 

[LibertyEagle]

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...






(just trying to save everyone some time)

 

[heavenlyboy34]

I always tell people that even if you don't believe in God, it's important to state that we get our rights from Him. Why? Because what man gives man can take away. No man and no government can take away my rights, because I get them from God.

Myself, I'd rather live in any society where the government recognizes a higher power (even if only in lip service), than one that does not. I would rather live in a Jewish Israel than China, Cuba, U.S.S.R or North Korea. I'd rather live in Islamic Iran or Turkey, than the godless communist countries.

As far as the irrational argument goes... the reason I got back into church was because I started pursing a degree in biology and the sciences. Taking science classes reminded me of what I already knew: that we didn't come from primordial balls of ooze.

What you (and others who advance your position) fail to understand is that by advocating a State, you are undermining the authority of Yahweh/Yeshua.

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Biblical Anarchism[/FONT][/FONT]

some key quotes from the longer article:

"[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]But most telling is what the Mosaic Law leaves out. There is no establishment of what we would now call an executive or a legislative body. There is no establishment of taxes (the religious rules require a tithe to support the priests but there is no punishment specified for failing to tithe). Civil order is kept by adherence to this legal code, private justice in the case of infractions of the code and private courts in the case of disagreements. In modern political terminology, this political system is called "anarchy." Anarchy literally means "without rulers." Modern libertarian anarchists (i.e. anarcho-capitalists), envision a system very much like this Mosaic system with no tax-funded political authority but with a system of private justice for mediating disputes and assigning restitution.[/FONT]"

"[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Reading what G-d actually says through Samuel is a sobering reminder of how deeply heretical our modern faith in the State is:[/FONT] [FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]And the LORD told him: "Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do."[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a king. He said, "This is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plough his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day." (I Samuel 8:7-18)[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Here, the Bible makes it absolutely clear that the change from the Mosaic anarchy to what by today's standards would be a "limited government" will have terrible consequences and shows a tremendous lack of faith in G-d. This passage makes clear that the people of Israel committed a grievous sin when they rejected G-d's anarchy for a State.[/FONT]"

 

[emazur]

God / Jesus is the Great Libertarian...advocate for free will. This society has definately gone to the toilet since God became passe. tones

I guess your view of Jesus depends on your point of view.
On one hand:
"The Libertarian From Nazareth?"
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/butler-b1.html

On the other:
YouTube - "Jesus was the first communist"

 

[Andrew-Austin]

I always tell people that even if you don't believe in God, it's important to state that we get our rights from Him. Why? Because what man gives man can take away. No man and no government can take away my rights, because I get them from God.

The existence of rights is a moral argument. You can make a moral argument without believing in God. The situation is the same for a Godless world or a Christian world - any man or the government can easily violate your rights. Just because someone infringes upon your rights, does not mean your right to liberty has been changed.

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

The reason this is in Off-topic is because it is not crawled by google and guests will not be confronted with the inevitable flames associated with discussing religion on a political forum (especially one with a libertarian bent). Trolls love it when religion is discussed as they can fan those flames and make a board look like a bunch of wackos... We have lost more valuable activists due to the religion wars than any other issue.

This way, those who are interested in spending their time discussing possibly impossible possibilities have a place to do so, without scaring off those who see no value in the discussion for political purposes, nor wasting the time of people like myself, who feel religion is personal and have no desire to evangelize.

And mods don't make sub-forums, nor can we put them anywhere...

 

[Ian A.]

It seems like some people here understand that without God, there is no OBJECTIVE morality or rights, there is only subjective beliefs--relative to each person and culture, but guys like emazur are skeptical:

Do not do onto others as what you would not have them do onto you. That is liberty. I don't need a god to tell me it's immoral to steal because I wouldn't want anyone stealing from me.

Yes, but stealing, killing, eating your own young, etc happens ALL THE TIME in the animal world. From an atheistic view, we are merely advanced primates who evolved to develop "morality" but this is all relative to each person, culture, and species. It has no deeper meaning. :o

Kludge gets the idea:

There isn't really a "moral" argument for atheists regarding why we ought to have rights other than it removes a lot of problems from social interaction by divvying out who owns what absolutely.

Exactly. Morality just makes life easier for the human species--no different than an ant who dies to protect the ant hill.

 

[ClayTrainor]

It seems like some people here understand that without God, there is no OBJECTIVE morality or rights, there is only subjective beliefs--relative to each person and culture, but guys like emazur are skeptical:

Rights are inherent in our nature. It matters not to me, if you give credit to a supernatural being for them, or not. Their nature does not change.

Yes, but stealing, killing, eating your own young, etc happens ALL THE TIME in the animal world.

You act as if that doesn't happen, all the time, in the human world. Abortion is as bad as eating your young, imo. Also, humans are animals, and are part of the kingdom of animalia. Our minds have simply evolved far superior to all other species on this planet, but we are still physically inferior in many respects. Why would God create so many predators that could rip humans to shreds, before we developed technology? Over 300,000 people in INdia have been killed by tigers in the last decade. Why would god give them reason and rights, but no physical power to defend them, until we invent things? Did he intend for us to be food, until we figure shit out?

Animal:
"any member of the kingdom Animalia, comprising multicellular organisms that have a well-defined shape and usually limited growth, can move voluntarily, actively acquire food and digest it internally, and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli" - Dictionary.com

We are animals...

From an atheistic view, we are merely advanced primates who evolved to develop "morality" but this is all relative to each person, culture, and species. It has no deeper meaning. :o

If someone dropped you off naked in a forest, with no technology and you encountered a pack of 20 hungry wolves. Do you have a right to life? Yes, but the wolves aren't going to respect it. Do the wolves have a right to free speech? Are you going to stop them if they howl? Of course they have that right, but i for one respect the natural rights of humans not wolves. Therefore, if i was present with a gun, i would kill every single wolf to defend your singular human life.

My morality comes from respect for individual rights of man. I recognize no supreme being as a certainty nor as a necessity for the rights to exist. They are natural and inherent in our existence, not supernatural and explained to us in ancient texts.

Also, we are evolved primates. We're apes in the same way that both tigers and household cats are felines. You might think we're special apes touched by the finger of God or something, but we're still apes.

Maybe god created an ape, that doesn't like to think he's an ape

Exactly. Morality just makes life easier for the human species--no different than an ant who dies to protect the ant hill.

Morality is defined by our natural rights, our natural rights are not defined by a supernatural Gods morality.

 

[ForLiberty-RonPaul]

objectivity is totally subjective