From: tsm@fastmail.ca   
      
   On Feb 16, 2026 at 1:25:18 PM EST, "Wilson"  wrote:   
      
   > On 2/16/2026 12:20 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >> On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 11:55:05 -0500, Wilson    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 2/16/2026 11:19 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>> On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 10:45:47 -0500, Wilson    
   >>>> wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On 2/16/2026 8:53 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 05:02:33 +0000, Creon  wrote:   
   >>>>>>> At Sat, 14 Feb 2026 14:30:45 -0500, Noah Sombrero    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2026 11:27:02 -0800, Dude  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 2/13/2026 9:52 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 09:27:41 -0800, Dude    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/13/2026 9:14 AM, Wilson wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/13/2026 12:53 AM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/12/26 9:15 AM, Wilson wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/12/2026 9:29 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What I mean is that governments can grant that they will not   
   impose   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> certain situations on you, which they still might.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But as far as the universe is concerned.  You have no rights.    
   There   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is no natural law to base social structures on.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It there were  natural laws that are inherent, universal, and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inalienable, derived from human nature and  reason rather than   
   granted   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by governments, to be inalienable natural laws, there would be   
   no way   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to not receive them.  Nobody would die, everybody would have   
   liberty,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and loving spouses.  The truth is you have no right to such   
   things,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and far too many around the world don't have them.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To be natural laws that are inherent, universal, and   
   inalienable, they   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would have to apply to everybody in the world, not only   
   americans. And   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when suffering people come to america seeking a place where   
   they can   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have such things, we could not send them back where they came   
   from.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is a deliberate misstatement of what natural law is all   
   about.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which is: There are certain principles that work better than   
   others.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> When human law and society aligns with those principles, the   
   systems   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> created within that structure perform better, allowing greater   
   human   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> flourishing.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> what worked last century, may not work this century, and will   
   not work   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> next century   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>      > the "law" can change when as technology unfolds   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>      >   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>      > #god   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> That's not how universal principles work.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Things like:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> - Don't steal   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> - Don't initiate harm to or murder other people   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> - Don't deliberately speak untruth   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> - Take responsibility for your actions   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> - Don't envy or promote resentment for what others have   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> It kind of looks like two informants are not smarter than a fifth   
   >>>>>>>>>>> grader. Maybe they think communism is a better system. It's   
   starting to   
   >>>>>>>>>>> look like that because they don't seem to have any cogent   
   arguments for   
   >>>>>>>>>>> a closed society. YMMV.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Everyone that's been to school in the US and Europe learned that   
   based   
   >>>>>>>>>>> on international law and philosophical tradition, humans are   
   considered   
   >>>>>>>>>>> to have innate, inherent, and inalienable human rights.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Learned.  Right that is how social structures get passed down.  And   
   >>>>>>>>>> true they must be learned.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> These rights are not granted by governments, but are possessed by   
   every   
   >>>>>>>>>>> individual from birth simply by virtue of being human.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Unless they are not permitted by governments.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Including rights to life, liberty, and freedom, as established by   
   the UN   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Maybe they need to get some   
   >>>>>>>>>>> smarts and read a history book.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Yes, too bad the un is so toothless.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> So, we are agreed. People have inalienable rights. Thanks.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Nope.  But you agree with yourself.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I agree with a lot of what you say, Noah, but not this.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Thanks.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> The idea that there are universal, inalienable rights is undone as   
   >>>>>> soon as somebody disagrees with it.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Some rights are inherently part of a human being -- I use   
   >>>>>>> the term "God-given", and perhaps I should star that with the   
   >>>>>>> caveat that "God", to me, is mostly "Logos" -- the Logos of   
   >>>>>>> Heraclitus, c. 500BCE   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> That idea is part of the attitude of those of us who enjoy such govt   
   >>>>>> given rights.  It allows us to not pay attention to those who enjoy no   
   >>>>>> such rights.  It, after all, is not the fault of evil govt since they   
   >>>>>> have no power to take away such rights, as they obviously do exactly   
   >>>>>> that.  So, of course, we have no duty to confront such govts.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> It is strange sometimes to watch the contortions of human thought.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> He used "Logos" to describe the "divine order".   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The idea of inherent human rights does not depend on whether people   
   >>>>> agree or disagree with the principles. Likewise the universality of   
   >>>>> those rights are not disproven by a government's power to deny them.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Upholding the idea of universal human rights gives the repressed a place   
   >>>>> to stand and declare their dignity and liberty as they are fighting   
   >>>>> against that repression.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It obscures the fact that govt's repress or grant and are responsible   
   >>>> for that.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Even if the government wins the battle and   
   >>>>> kills every one of them, the knowledge that there is a reality which   
   >>>>> transcends our temporal lives gives hope to the people to continue on.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The awareness that there are principles which are very real, that show   
   >>>>> humanity the best way to be, tells us that those ideas will never die   
   >>>>> and someday will manifest. Because they are true, unchanging, and an   
   >>>>> intrinsic part of all who live.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> And so you continue to contort and I continue to not accept.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Underlying this is your belief that you know the best way to be, and I   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)