3 ms·

You did a great job of misinterpreting what I said, but what I said is true and not even remotely psychotic. If anything, your reaction is a little crazy! I wou

You did a great job of misinterpreting what I said, but what I said is true and not even remotely psychotic. If anything, your reaction is a little crazy! I would like to note that you had no counterargument. You surely don't have a right to food. You go out and get it yourself! I, on the other hand, have a moral responsibility to share my extra food with those who lack. I base my morality on my belief in God and what he expects of me. I am curious what you base your morality off of. > But we aren't all on this planet together so we can deny others food Speaking of psychotic, How did "I have a responsibility for the poor and needy" get converted in your head to "I am on this planet so I can deny food to others"?

analognoise 4y ago
"You go out and get it yourself!" - Except those who need food frequently can't. Children, the sick, the injured. We take care of these people and have a moral obligation to feed them because they have a right to food. People absolutely have a right to food. A positive right, no less, that can't be denied. People used to get it from "the commons" - since we've enclosed them all to shift to our current modes of...well, everything, we have to replace what people would have gotten from the commons previously and provide it free of charge, as a right to things on this earth that people would have had. Like food. Currently what we do is burn the excess to keep the prices up. We've long since been able to make the food free; we don't and it is immoral (like a good number of our social constructs, imo). No, no religion on my end. I just think it's obvious people have a right to food, like they have a right to clean air, water and shelter.
- PathOfEclipse 4y ago
  > No, no religion on my end. I am definitely not surprised. Atheists seem to be the loudest about proclaiming positive rights. And, yet, it is within atheist governments where people are least likely to experience these "rights", or even the right to life: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism That is no accident. > I just think it's obvious people have a right to food, like they have a right to clean air, water and shelter. That's neat. I can't help but notice you declined to justify this belief. And that's part of the problem. Secular humanism has no foundation. Instead, it relies on the foundations Christianity built. As that erodes, so too will human flourishing in general!

analognoise 4y ago

"You go out and get it yourself!" - Except those who need food frequently can't. Children, the sick, the injured. We take care of these people and have a moral obligation to feed them because they have a right to food. People absolutely have a right to food. A positive right, no less, that can't be denied. People used to get it from "the commons" - since we've enclosed them all to shift to our current modes of...well, everything, we have to replace what people would have gotten from the commons previously and provide it free of charge, as a right to things on this earth that people would have had. Like food. Currently what we do is burn the excess to keep the prices up. We've long since been able to make the food free; we don't and it is immoral (like a good number of our social constructs, imo). No, no religion on my end. I just think it's obvious people have a right to food, like they have a right to clean air, water and shelter.

PathOfEclipse 4y ago
> No, no religion on my end. I am definitely not surprised. Atheists seem to be the loudest about proclaiming positive rights. And, yet, it is within atheist governments where people are least likely to experience these "rights", or even the right to life: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism That is no accident. > I just think it's obvious people have a right to food, like they have a right to clean air, water and shelter. That's neat. I can't help but notice you declined to justify this belief. And that's part of the problem. Secular humanism has no foundation. Instead, it relies on the foundations Christianity built. As that erodes, so too will human flourishing in general!