God's injustice towards Adam and Eve

[John V]

As you shouldn't. Even when we create things, we're working on things already created by god, using abilities given to us by god. Our ownership of what we create doesn't equal god's. Yet, if you build a boat I don't have a right to come and sail it, or if you just string words together and copyright them, I don't have the right to use them for profit.

And as I said to Stat, if you trap me in a cell, you aren't owed rent on my occupancy. What you're describing isn't ownership, it's entrapment.

How is saying that you own a written work which you created entrapment? You seem to be making a complete non sequitur in order to avoid my points.

On earth, we're the sole species possessed of our particular threshold of intelligence and self awareness. We are self determining in a way that other creatures aren't, it's a special quality, one we already realize makes it immoral to own a human being. Now, I know your god is down with slavery, but fiat assertions about that aren't convincing; so far I haven't seen any argument as to why god should own people that aren't references to objects. I've been arguing from the beginning that our capacity for intelligence and self determination requires special consideration, and so far all I've gotten back is "no it doesn't because god owns all objects."

That's not true. I've pointed out that your argument based on mental capacity can be extended to God, who has greater mental capacity than us.

Human psychology and well being? Our freedom and self determination is sort of core to our identities, you know. I'd remind you that you also have a burden of proof for your positive claim: at least I've tried to shoulder mine.

I tried to support mine by making analogy to things we create, but you responded with a complete non sequitur.

I've used your own reasoning regarding rights due to mental capacity and applied them to god.

But that's just an assertion, hinging on your flat dismissal of my claim that complex intelligence requires additional consideration, and that you can't own a mind.

I don't find "no, you're wrong," to be compelling, John.

I haven't said you're wrong. I've said, and repeat, that you haven't done anything to logically support your assertion. You're basically saying that our level of intelligence is deserving of autonomy because, well, that's convenient for your position.