|
|
|
Kaptain K
New Member
USA
45 Posts |
 Posted - 09/15/2001 : 13:17:16 [Permalink]
|
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
|
 |
|
|
bestonnet_00
Skeptic Friend
Australia
358 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 01:17:39 [Permalink]
|
How many times does that quote have to come up? It doesn't even take account of safety being a form of liberty.
I have a better quote "Those who give up safety for a small incresae in non safety liberty will have both their non safety liberty and safety decreased in the long term."
When it comes to liberty it is not natural but decided upon by humans. That means that the population of a state decide what people are allowed to do (at least in democracies). If a liberty is inconvenient for society then it can be removed or reduced in extent. New liberties can also be created if the need arises (both of these happen throughout history).
I really do wish people would provide a real argument instead of throwing out a quote of a person who died long ago and thinking they have won the debate.
Radioactive GM Crops.
Slightly above background.
Safe to eat.
But no activist would dare rip it out.
As they think it gives them cancer. |
|
|
|
Kaptain K
New Member
USA
45 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 05:37:10 [Permalink]
|
There is a basic and often overlooked distinction between a "free country" and a country of "free people". The US is a free country (arguably the free-est on the planet at this time and almost free as the former USSR was. The US is also (still) a country of free people but less so than it was (and becoming less so every year).
KK
|
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 08:37:08 [Permalink]
|
I asked this elsewhere once Bestonnet - what makes the government so much better at choosing what is best for its citizens? Are we to trust a few and not think for ourselves? Are we to take no responsibility and lay all the blame at the government for not protecting us? Why is the government better equipped to make decisions for me than I am?
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell! |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 13:17:34 [Permalink]
|
What? You can't trust the governemt? The representitives selected by a shallow, underinformed eloctorate? What's wrong with that? 
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 09/17/2001 : 08:37:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
How many times does that quote have to come up? It doesn't even take account of safety being a form of liberty.
I have a better quote "Those who give up safety for a small incresae in non safety liberty will have both their non safety liberty and safety decreased in the long term."
When it comes to liberty it is not natural but decided upon by humans. That means that the population of a state decide what people are allowed to do (at least in democracies). If a liberty is inconvenient for society then it can be removed or reduced in extent. New liberties can also be created if the need arises (both of these happen throughout history).
I really do wish people would provide a real argument instead of throwing out a quote of a person who died long ago and thinking they have won the debate.
Radioactive GM Crops.
Slightly above background.
Safe to eat.
But no activist would dare rip it out.
As they think it gives them cancer.
Do you honestly believe that you know whats best for everyone better than anyone else? What gives you a monopoly on truth? If you want to give up your rights so lightly, go ahead. Just don't include me in on it. There are some laws in which we give up certian freedoms in lieu of saftey. The driving laws which differ from state to state is evidence of that as well as the laws concerning the transportation and storage of hazardous materials. These laws, however, should be based on real, measurable data. The scofflaw who wants to run a red-light is going to do that whether or not there is a camera. The fleeing criminal obeys no traffic rule. The possibility for the abuse of the equipment in question is so great that it should not be in place. We must be especially careful when we choose to give up rights so as not to encourage tyranny. What you are defending is paramount to Nixon's wired society. A concept named "Big Brother" by Orwell. I think that the small decrease of saftey is made up for by the effect of loss of freedom the alternative puts forth. If you want to repeal the fourth amendment, then try to get it passed. The interpretation of the fourth amendment when it comes to traffic stops is clear. A police officer may not search a vehicle without probable cause. By placing cameras at intersections high enough to see into the cars, it would violate the fourth amendment for those citizens who are just driving along without probable cause.
|
|
|
|
bestonnet_00
Skeptic Friend
Australia
358 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2001 : 01:18:42 [Permalink]
|
Kaptain K: Please don't move the debate to a different topic until either someone gives up or an agreement of disagreement is reached. Also please remember that some people really don't care what the US consitution says about freedom. Its only a piece of paper and should only be used to prove:
- Somethings about US law
- A little bit about those that wrote it
Anyway as for free country. The US actually rates quite poorly compared with the social democracies of Northern Europe which have far more active governments. Whilst some choices are best made by individuals and markets there are some that are best left to government (should ideally be made by the majority of people in the nation).
Another reason why government should exist is because it is needed by society. Whilst conservatives and libertarians may like to get government out of certain areas of life (they still want government to exist when it suits them) whenever government steps back and allows the market to rule the place things go right down.
Laws in any good society come from what the majority of the people living in that society want with some compromise for the minority.
Human Freedom Index
Sweden 38
Denmark 38
Netherlands 37
Austria 36
Finland 36
France 35
Germany 35
Canada 34
Switzerland 34
Australia 33
United States 33
Japan 32
United Kingdom 32
Radioactive GM Crops.
Slightly above background.
Safe to eat.
But no activist would dare rip it out.
As they think it gives them cancer. |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2001 : 01:25:09 [Permalink]
|
You know, I wouldn't mind living in Denmark someday but their ranking on that Freedon Index(is that one of those "pieces of paper" too?).
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2001 : 01:40:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Human Freedom Index
Sweden 38
???
How do you get these numbers?
How do you define freedom?
We do have freedom from annoying Xtians in politics, is that what gives us the high index?
"A society without religion is like a crazed psychopath without a loaded .45"
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2001 : 01:50:55 [Permalink]
|
I think he accidently gave the numbers for the Nordic Babe Index.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Wendy
SFN Regular
USA
614 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2001 : 05:17:01 [Permalink]
|
I've expressed my thoughts on this topic already, so I'll lay off, but I do want to say a blanket "thank you" to those of you who have expressed a desire to protect and maintain your personal freedom. I was beginning to think society was filled with apathetic lemmings who just get along and go along. Like anything worth having, freedom does have its cost. I'm just glad there are still people in this country who realize how priceless it is.
Wendy Jones
Edited by - wendy on 09/18/2001 05:18:34 |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2001 : 12:14:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Kaptain K: Please don't move the debate to a different topic until either someone gives up or an agreement of disagreement is reached.
Personally I think the comment is relevant. Every year through ignorance or apathy US citizens give up more and more freedoms to it's government.
quote:
Also please remember that some people really don't care what the US consitution says about freedom. Its only a piece of paper and should only be used to prove:
- Somethings about US law
- A little bit about those that wrote it
Well, I happen to care very much about the constitution - otherwise I would not have sworn an oath to uphold that *piece of paper*. It is the premise upon which this country is based, a document designed to last through out the years as a basic premise upon which to build a free nation. We can alter it, overthrow our own government should it become oppressive, we can speak out against our government or against what ticks us off. That document guarantees those rights. Why do we care what it says, quite simply it has formed the society in which we live.
quote:
Anyway as for free country. The US actually rates quite poorly compared with the social democracies of Northern Europe which have far more active governments. Whilst some choices are best made by individuals and markets there are some that are best left to government (should ideally be made by the majority of people in the nation).
Why are some choices best made by government? Which choices are best made by governments? Who decides? Again, why is the government better equipped to make these decisions that affect my day to day life than I?
quote:
Another reason why government should exist is because it is needed by society. Whilst conservatives and libertarians may like to get government out of certain areas of life (they still want government to exist when it suits them) whenever government steps back and allows the market to rule the place things go right down.
Government exists to allow people a purpose in common, to rally around in times of trial. But, according to the constitution (going way back here) the only reason the federal government is allowed to tax its citizens is for the raising of an army in national defense. It was the premise of the founding fathers that government should interfere as little as possible.
quote:
Laws in any good society come from what the majority of the people living in that society want with some compromise for the minority.
That is the basic premise of the constitution. Government: for the people by the people.
quote:
Human Freedom Index
Sweden 38
Denmark 38
Netherlands 37
Austria 36
Finland 36
France 35
Germany 35
Canada 34
Switzerland 34
Australia 33
United States 33
Japan 32
United Kingdom 32
Um, fine. But what do these numbers mean? What are they based on? How are they determined? What is the data set used to gain these numbers? Without that - its just a bunch of meaningless numbers.
Maybe you have to be an American to understand the ideal of Freedom as expressed by Americans. But it does not mean giving up basic freedoms (the right to be protected against illegal search and seizure - the fourth amendment) to the government.
Or do you think it's ok for your government to house military troops in your home? Do you think it's ok for your government to send its agents to enter your home for no reason? Do you think it's ok for your government to tell you what to think? These are the things our founding fathers were fighting against, these are things that we can not and will not allow in our country.
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell! |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
