• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is taking part in voting an order?

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
It's a duty as a citizen. With rights come responsibilities. If people ignore responsibilities, institutions and nations collapse.

We have the right to bear arms. Women want the right to have abortions. The right to vote is very similar to these in terms of the dynamics. We do not have to own guns or not, nor do we have to have forced abortions or not. We have a choice. Voting is the same way. We have the option to vote, but we are not forced to use this right or not. A right allows for full choice.

One glaring difference between these three rights; voting, owning a gun and abortion, is voting and owning guns applies to both males and females, whereas abortion discriminates against males. This tells me that abortion is not a human right, since it discriminates against half the humans. It is better described as an entitlement. Rights apply to all. Entitlements discriminate by law; systemic sexism.

The term a women's right to abortion is a deliberate misnomer, since a right does not only apply to only a select fraction of the citizens. This left wing often uses word games, so legal and semantic confusion will appear. It is not a right which applies to all. There are no male rights that exclude women, carved into law. That hypothetical example would be an entitlement, since it creates haves and have nots.

To make abortion a right, both the father and mother would need to be in on the decision. The father would be able to express his right to choose, or just have his wife or date decide. If one person in a marriage wanted a gun, and their other did not, they would need to negotiate between themselves. Neither the husband or the wife are entailed, by law, to make that call. This is not a male entitlement. Once voices are silenced, then rights are removed and entitlements appear.

Entitlement are less based on Democracy, where we all have choices, such as to vote. It becomes more based on the older and obsolete monarchy model, that US Constitution overcame. The King and/or Queen of old had all type of entitlement that nobody else can have. Only they could own all the land. Only they could impose taxation without representation, such as forcing taxes, on those who are not entitled, to support entitled people; abortion. Voting is above entitlements, since we all have the option. This is not an entitlement, that applies to the elite few, with everyone else having no say. That becomes monarchist and regressive.

What I would like to see in terms of an upgrade to voting, is to have an objectivity test to show you understand both sides of the issues. A good voter is well informed and not just a trained horse who can be trained to stamp their hoofs, on command, once for yay and twice for nay. All the campaign money for marketing and mud slinging, is to train horses, not create full objectivity.

For example, if you automatically vote one party without even knowing all the candidates, you are a trained horse. There is no objectivity, so even a trained horse can be taught to vote this way. This can lead to problems since disinformation and censorship, by some horse owners, makes it too easy to manipulate extra horses in one direction; Twitter scams.

An objectivity test for have a right, is not without precedent. For example, the right to bear arms, requires one study gun safety, and be able to demonstrate proficiency and sound and legal judgment in front of members of law enforcement. That right has a maturity/ practical reality standard, to be able to use that right. Voting and abortion are very watered down by comparison; entitled horses are too easy to create.

An objective person is looking out for the whole country, that gave them that important right to vote. Both sides have good ideas and these could be integrated for all. The objective person is not looking out for half the country, who seeks to limit the rights of the other half of the country; Lefty Swamp used social media, eq..Twitter, to limit free speech for one half of the country.

The objective person has a wider view than a horse with blinders. Not knowing the differences between entitlements versus rights, is OK for, trained horses. Objective people should be able to see the difference. Horses do not need rights, only entitlements, for oats and water. The entitlement mentality; Swamp thinks and acts like it is above the law, is what is causing the division, in our free country of rights, where there is supposed to be one law for all. Two sets of laws is entitlement, and a throw back to regressive monarchy, where right and entitlements are purposely confused.
 
Last edited:

We Never Know

No Slack
You share some of the blame. It is not all your fault. But people that voted for him should have known better.
:facepalm: :facepalm:

Good grief x2. I couldn't help but reply. You are replying here to a post made in another thread!
Are you lost Lmfao

By the way, this is the thread to the post you just responded to

 

We Never Know

No Slack
I do not know what country you are in, but in the USA rights can most definitely be taken away.
Even the right to vote.

Rights are rights regardless. Too many don't understand most of what we are told are our rights are in reality privileges that if you don't follow the rules will be taken away..
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
:facepalm: :facepalm:

Good grief x2. I couldn't help but reply. You are replying here to a post made in another thread!
Are you lost Lmfao

By the way, this is the thread to the post you just responded to

I was responding to the topic of this thread. Once again you shoot yourself in the foot by using the facepalm emoji when it only applies to you.

Thank you so much!
 
Top