Gov. Shutdown?

[sanantone]

Correct, and yet the Big Bang has never been observed. I believe it takes more faith to believe that everything came from nothing but an infinitely dense point of singularity than to believe in creationism.

The Big Bang Theory is just that, a theory. It would not be called a theory if it were proven as fact. I asked my ultra-religious friend once how God came into existence. He said that God always was because He exists outside of time and space. In other words, there is no explanation for how a supernatural being of no mass came into existence and how He created matter. I don't see how this is any easier to believe than the Big Bang Theory.

says who ?

just because that's your point of view doesn't make it the correct point of view

and it certainly isn't the point of view demonstrated by people through out history
the definitions of "happiness", "freedom, and even "person" has always been defined by the time and place and people involved

That has been my argument all along. Remember, many of these people were following the same religions we follow now.

The french empire, the british empire, the spanish empire, the mongol empire, greeks, the babylonians ...

it certainly seems to me that by looking at history and nature the natural order of things is to conquer, the strong survive

More religious people who did ungodly things. The Moors also came out of Africa and ruled parts of Europe for several decades.

you certainly seem to believe in some magical, "everybody lives happily ever after fairy tale"

Where are you getting this from? I have came up with several examples of people not following social norms or even their own religions.

but like you said let's look at what's observed



yes, let's look at, observe those great apes

---------------------
Primate Behavior: Social Structure

"An even darker side of male chimpanzee behavior is that they occasionally murder members of other chimpanzee communities. Groups of males periodically go on aggressive raids into neighboring territories where they isolate individual males and then violently beat and bite them to death. Over time, these marauding gangs will kill all of the males in the targeted communities if they can. They also have been observed eating the infants there"
---------------------

primates.com : great apes : gorillas

"Lone silver-back males will challenge a resident silver-back and try to get the females to come with him (Estes, 1991). The resident male does actively prevent the females from going with him, but rather performs elaborate displays to keep the lone silver-back from approaching (Estes, 1991). A lone silver-back will generally approach a group that has a female undergoing estrus (Estes, 1991). Infanticide has been known to occur when a lone silver-back challenges the resident silver-back, he would do this because a female will start estrus sooner if her infant has died and is no longer nursing (Estes, 1991)."
---------------------

infanticide, cannibalism, war, challenges for power

there is your NATURAL order

human are trying to evolve the most UNnatural order imaginable

Yes, they are a lot like humans except they don't pretend that religion makes them more civilized. Of course, humans have the intelligence to write laws and maintain the order that has made us successful as a species. Human intelligence is natural. These conquests you love to talk about so much were of outgroups to protect the interests of ingroups. Some of them were also done to expand the ingroup. This goes back to me talking about humans making sure their communities (social groups) survive.

whether people today would agree with me or not doesn't matter
what's important is people (insert European overlord nation as you see fit) at the time agreed with me

they surely didn't believe "People should have the freedom to pursue happiness as long as they don't get in the way of some other person's pursuit of happiness."

they believed in the natural order

They also believed in God and that their rulers had the divine right to rule. You're also ignoring the fact that some wars had a religious component. Some wars were fought to spread a religion, because people thought they were their god's or gods' chosen people and were superior to everyone else, because their god(s) told them to, and to gain control of holy lands. Obviously, the absolute or universal truths of religion are often not followed by those who believe in them, therefore, they are failing as control mechanisms. Secular democracies are less likely to fight offensive wars.

of course he immediately contradicts himself by stating this as an absolute
"Humans can only do their best to try to make sure that individuals are free to pursue happiness. "

How is that a statement of something absolute?