All forms of government are only as good as the people that they are made up of. What form of government do you suggest to be the best Deanohh? I don't think democracy is perfect, as is anything, but I do think it's the most just form of government that we've come up with so far.
__________________
You meet the nicest people on a Honda.
The problem with the theory that rights come from a "Creator" is that a creator is an arbitrary assertion, ergo rights are also an arbitrary assertion. One could as easily assert that rights come from luminiferous aether.
The rights of man derive instead from man's nature as a rational being, whose survival requires that his mind must be allowed to operate unencumbered by non-rational influences that arise out of force and coercion. Thus rights are an essential requirement of man's survival and existence on earth. To the degree that rights are respected and freedom prevails, man prospers.
Democracy can never protect man's rights, because the tendency toward tyranny of the majority or the minority will operate to subvert them. Rights can only be protected by a government of limited powers, that is operated by representatives who believe in the principles of limited government, who are in turn selected by an electorate holding the same belief.
Democracy can never protect man's rights, because the tendency toward tyranny of the majority or the minority will operate to subvert them. Rights can only be protected by a government of limited powers, that is operated by representatives who believe in the principles of limited government, who are in turn selected by an electorate holding the same belief.
This is very true and quite a profound concept.
Democracy itself is a shambles. A powerful system of laws and government, established, maintained and evolved by democratic process, gives the maximum advancement and highest justice to mankind.
Appeals to a creator, as you have rightly noted, are arbitrary since the alleged creator does not dialogue or intercede with his creation but instead seems to leave ambiguous clues indistinguishable from randomness.
A strong central, accountable and fungible government is the lynchpin.
No. pure democracies easily become corrupt and are inherently unjust....slavery, holocaust, etc.
With all due respect, but no. Pure democracies leading to the holocaust? The holocaust was a very specific result of a political entity with specific problems (such as hyper inflation, Dolchstoßlegende and overal poverty) combined with a very weak constitution. To be sure, I don't see how this could've been fixed with a less secular approach. More checks and balances within the system (as with the current German Constitution - the Bundesverfassungsgericht is a very stable institution) and less concentration of power, as of current with the divided powers over the various Bundesländer. But I don't see what this has to do with secularism per se. As far as I'm aware, there's no official German State Church.
Next to that, even Christian nations as Britain with a moderate democracy (at that time) and America as a republic supported slavery for a long time - heck, America had a racist segregated society until the '60's. Do you want to maintain that was a good system or that it's one of the blessings of a republic? Far more important are cultural notions and ideas and the way they persist through a society.
Hijacking a democracy is possible, but is not democracy per se that is at fault. Hitler never attained any majority (he even lost support at the election power to the Machtsangriff - I think from 34% to 32%, but I could be wrong - for example). I still believe more democratic forms of government are very viable; as long as they're contained within a strong state of law and no concentrations of power (a la Rousseau) and within a society that as a whole consists out of balanced people without heavy grievances; an egalitarian society (like Sweden, Denmark, Norway or perhaps Finland).
