The myth and religion of "rights" - the new opiate of the secular masses

Sep 2019
162
11
Evolution's bosom
As per the sciences and their associated empirical evidence, the existence of any "rights" is every bit as much a myth and superstition as the existence of ghosts, goblins, flying spaghetti monsters and what not.

Americans no longer content with opiating themselves with religion, have instead taken to opiating themselves with rights, freedoms, and other selfish whims - believing that their archaic Constitution will save them from their crass materialism and self-created miseries.

In reality, a man or a woman have no "rights" whatsoever beyond what what is in the collective interest of the race. Whether a feminist believing she has any "rights" beyond what is in survival incentive, or an atheist believing that his imaginary friend the Flying Spaghetti monster is anything more than a substitute for Jesus, somehow capable of saving him from his obesity and other crass addictions.

Their only "right" is what Nietzsche referred to as their "will to power" - their biological imperative and incentive to evolve or die with the hand of evolution's might. Both science and religion have proven evolutionary useful utilities in advancing the species - and if evolution has happened to select a religion as its instrument for administering its might - the mythical notion that an atheist or a secular has any "rights" whatsoever is as quaint as the notion of faith in an imaginary friend.

If evolution elects to use religion as its social instrument for eliminate a worthless atheist, just as it might use science to eliminate a worthless religion - neither or has any rights whatsoever, they're simply on the receiving end of evolution's agency, and of their own defectiveness.
 
Sep 2019
162
11
Evolution's bosom
Lenin would be proud of this low IQ thread.
Okay then, show me any empirical, testable scientific evidences that "rights" exist at all, as opposed to being merely a figment of the imagination. Evolution doesn't acknowledge their existence anymore than it does that of Jesus Christ

"Rights" are just a modern substitute for religion and mythology, because weaklings, whether religious or secular - have to cling to something magical to pretend it will save them or care about them when death comes knocking.

Such is the fate of selfish degenerates and consumerists, and why only a nation founded on evolutionary values, rather than archaic and mythical notions of "rights", "freedoms", "Constitutions" and so forth is the solution.
 

Rasselas

Moderator
Feb 2010
74,312
53,060
USA
Okay then, show me any empirical, testable scientific evidences that "rights" exist at all, as opposed to being merely a figment of the imagination.
Read Rousseau. Rights are not a scientific construct. They are a social construct. Humans living in what Rousseau called a "state of nature" (without society) have freedom in the same way that any other creature has freedom. Any animal has freedom, assuming it has the ability to form the volition to exercise it.
 

CtC

Mar 2019
14,629
5,296
California
As per the sciences and their associated empirical evidence, the existence of any "rights" is every bit as much a myth and superstition as the existence of ghosts, goblins, flying spaghetti monsters and what not.

Americans no longer content with opiating themselves with religion, have instead taken to opiating themselves with rights, freedoms, and other selfish whims - believing that their archaic Constitution will save them from their crass materialism and self-created miseries.

In reality, a man or a woman have no "rights" whatsoever beyond what what is in the collective interest of the race. Whether a feminist believing she has any "rights" beyond what is in survival incentive, or an atheist believing that his imaginary friend the Flying Spaghetti monster is anything more than a substitute for Jesus, somehow capable of saving him from his obesity and other crass addictions.

Their only "right" is what Nietzsche referred to as their "will to power" - their biological imperative and incentive to evolve or die with the hand of evolution's might. Both science and religion have proven evolutionary useful utilities in advancing the species - and if evolution has happened to select a religion as its instrument for administering its might - the mythical notion that an atheist or a secular has any "rights" whatsoever is as quaint as the notion of faith in an imaginary friend.

If evolution elects to use religion as its social instrument for eliminate a worthless atheist, just as it might use science to eliminate a worthless religion - neither or has any rights whatsoever, they're simply on the receiving end of evolution's agency, and of their own defectiveness.
Neitzsche had Syphilis and went mad. That is a source?
 
Jul 2011
4,402
6,893
UK/Australia
Tempting as it may be to detractors to dismiss the OP as heretical or maniacal, it is a concept worth examining. As Rousseau points out - 'rights' are a social construct, and generally meaningless outside society. The lamb enjoys no right not to become the lion's supper in nature.

However high-minded and lofty our pronouncements - the rights of man only have agency within the society of other men. If our particular society does not subscribe to certain rights - we do not enjoy them. There are no God-given rights, if our society does not recognise them as such.
 
Sep 2019
162
11
Evolution's bosom
Legitimate point.

What, for example, does a secular does a foolish atheist think he will gain, for imagining that "science" or "evolution" is on his side, or that he has any "right" to exist whatsoever beyond what the people elect to allow?

"Science" is merely his imaginary friend, as in the case of popular atheist defectives like popular Youtubers "TJ Kirk" or "AaronRa". "Evolution" does not care about fools like this who are obviously much closer in relation to apes than the general population - they're merely it's refuse, a mistake for the evolved members of society to learn from



"Science" is merely his imaginary friend, as in the case of popular atheist defective like popular Youtubers "TJ Kirk" or "AaronRa". "Evolution" does not care about fools like this who are obviously much closer in relation to apes than the general population - they're merely it's refuse, a mistake for the evolved members of society to learn from.
 
Jul 2011
4,402
6,893
UK/Australia
I'm sorry, but you lost me in your diatribe against science. Science is not an entity which can be either friend or foe. It is simply the empirical method by which we examine issues and arrive at logical conclusions. When more evidence is unearthed, we often alter those conclusions.
 
Jul 2013
60,116
67,852
Nashville, TN
Why all the vitriol? Society defines rights, not religion, not "atheist defectives", and certainly not you. In Korowai society you would have the "right" to be roasted up as long pig to feed the tribe...In US society you have the right to post your manifesto on a message board<shrug> Each instance has the same import.