patergentium/wellspring
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 1 Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Update 01-principles-apologia.md

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
wellspringcp
2020-09-05 17:52:07 +10:00
committed by GitHub
parent 2f302b8ad0
commit 376d33cf6a
1 changed files with 3 additions and 1 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
01-principles/01-principles-apologia.md
View File

@@ -112,10 +112,12 @@ This section examines a scenario where we pit believers in both of the tradition
Let's assume that the would-be victim is a Judeo-Christian "God-given rights" believer. Let's assume that the would-be victim is a Judeo-Christian "God-given rights" believer.
To convince the audience, he would say, "God created all men in his image, and in each person is the potential to become a son of god - and so god values all human lives because they are all potentially his children. When you violate a human life, you potentially deprive god of a future child, and you also disrespect the image of god inherent in that person. Therefore, you, audience, should fear god and come to my aid." To convince the audience, he would say, "God created all men in his image, and in each person is the potential to become a son of god - and so god values all human lives because they are all potentially his children. When you violate a human life, you potentially deprive god of a future child, and you also disrespect the image of god inherent in that person; and god, the injured party will eventually take up his quarrel on judgmment day. Therefore, you, audience, should fear god and come to my aid."
This would-be victim's rights rest entirely on whether or not the Judeo-Christian god exists. If he doesn't exist, or if a god exists but is not the Judeo-Christian god, his argument is invalid and his claim to rights has no strength. His would-be violator need only say, "Your god does not exist," and unless the would-be victim could prove that his god exists, he loses the argument. This would-be victim's rights rest entirely on whether or not the Judeo-Christian god exists. If he doesn't exist, or if a god exists but is not the Judeo-Christian god, his argument is invalid and his claim to rights has no strength. His would-be violator need only say, "Your god does not exist," and unless the would-be victim could prove that his god exists, he loses the argument.
Again, note that `WS` is not opining on whether or not god does exist and would really take up the quarrel on judgment day. `WS` is seeking a framework which will produce desirable results here on earth, in this lifetime.
The "God-given rights" foundation cannot serve as a common framework for asserting rights among large numbers of people who have wildly divergent world views. The "God-given rights" foundation cannot serve as a common framework for asserting rights among large numbers of people who have wildly divergent world views.
#### The "Equality" tradition: #### The "Equality" tradition: