On freedom, rights and government. Long post.

[TheGrey]

This is long, but hopefully coherent. I'd love to hear your thoughts!

During the latest gun-control flurries, I’ve watched the posts on this forum closely. I have learned a great deal from a lot of you, and I have both understood and empathized with the justifiable anger that’s been displayed.

One thing that I’ve noticed is a repeating pattern of “They’retaking away our rights!” being posted. But the context of the posts makes me wonder if the basics of “rights”and “freedom” are actually understood by some of the people that are on the fence, or that are okay with a little bit of freedom being nibbled away. Sometimes it’s difficult to break an idea down even further, to understand what’s at the root. I’m not suggesting it’s a matter of intellect; maybe it’s just a matterof thinking in a slightly different direction.

I am re-reading a science-fiction series by David Gerrold. The series will be seven novels(there are four so far,) collectively called “War Against the Cthorr.” Mr.Gerrold brings a lot of concepts to the forefront: the loss of freedoms, the conceptsbehind civics, service, the psychology of war and many others. Although I’ve read One Second After, this series of books is more real to me than OSA- they’re highly disturbing in the implications and deal with situations that are all-encompassing and intensely personal. He writes in much the same style as Robert Heinlein, and has dedicated the first book to the Heinleins (Starship Troopers, anyone?)
In the first book, “A Matter for Men,” the Global Ethics instructor defines the word ‘freedom’ as being responsible for your own actions. Free people seize and use opportunities in a responsible fashion.

‘Rights’ are a bit trickier to define. Many people I speak with have a tough timebreaking down ‘rights’; they think that because ‘rights’ are ‘guaranteed’ inthe Constitution, that’s as far as it goes. I know that was what I thought when I was growing up; that’s what my parentsand teachers told me and I believed it was unassailable. We now know differently.

In the book, ‘rights’ are described as “That which is due aparty by just claim, legal guarantee, or moral principle.” Although there is an illusion of ownership granted through these rights, ownership is actually an illusion ofcontrol. Rights are essentially “the opportunity to be responsible for yourself.” Everything you need as a tool tomake the most of these rights means it is up to you.

Responsibility seems to be a reoccurring theme with these definitions. Responsible people are looked at as adult; responsible people often don’t require assistance because they have prepared for situations. They have wisdom and experience. They can reason. Responsible people do not want unwelcome advice, unwelcome rules that impose upon their plans, or aspersions cast byignorant or inexperienced people.

Right now, our government is overreaching its original,intended purposes. Another definition provided in this book is that of the purpose of government. I will quote: “The only justifiable reason for a government to exist is to act on behalf of the member population in a delegated area of specific responsibility.” A delegated area of responsibility is anything that enough people are committed to, right or wrong. To me, that means that even if the recalls work, there is a chance that someone else just like that person will replace them unless we also take responsibility to insure this does not happen. It’s not something that we can continue to react, once per election cycle. It’s a long-term commitment to maintain our freedoms.

I’m very interested to hear your thoughts on defining ‘freedom,’‘rights,’ and ‘responsibility.’

[OtterbatHellcat]

Freedom to me, is doing whatever the hell I want to do under the sun, as long as I don't break any laws in the process.....or infringe on anybody elses Rights at the same time. Rights to me, is kind of a touchy subject in general with a broad range of interpretation on either side of a given situation, even though they are clearly stated. Responsibility is a no brainer to me.

I know you would like to hear others thoughts on your questions, and I wonder where you are coming from as to the reason why. I guess we're gonna find out soon enough.

[Great-Kazoo]

Your font is too small to read the way it is. Please, make it larger for those of use who can't see. It looks like a run on sentence.

[BlasterBob]

Your font is too small to read the way it is. Please, make it larger for those of use who can't see. It looks like a run on sentence.


Jim, your first sentence is almost too small to read. Let's kick it up a bit for us older guys who do NOT have 20/20 vision.[ROFL2]

[Dingo]

Rights: Given to me by God, preserved by my own choices, assisted by Mikhail Kalishnakov and Gaston Glock.
Freedom: The ability to practice those rights without fearing governmental/libtard opression. (Of the two, this is the one that's in jeopardy - my "rights" will not dissolve just because some asshat damnocrat feels sniffly and skittish about them)

[Great-Kazoo]

Jim, your first sentence is almost too small to read. Let's kick it up a bit for us older guys who do NOT have 20/20 vision.[ROFL2]


this better? ;)

[TheGrey]

Freedom to me, is doing whatever the hell I want to do under the sun, as long as I don't break any laws in the process.....or infringe on anybody elses Rights at the same time. Rights to me, is kind of a touchy subject in general with a broad range of interpretation on either side of a given situation, even though they are clearly stated. Responsibility is a no brainer to me.

I know you would like to hear others thoughts on your questions, and I wonder where you are coming from as to the reason why. I guess we're gonna find out soon enough.

Hi, Otterbatcat. I guess I'm asking these questions of the people on the forum because many of the legislators seem to have their own ways of defining 'freedom,' 'rights' and 'responsibility.' I'm interested in how the forumites apply these terms.

Your definition of freedom is a good one- the part that is interesting to me is that you include the caveat of 'as long as I don't break any laws in the process.' Laws are being passed now that impinge upon our freedoms. You're correct in that 'rights' seems to have a broad range of interpreteation on either side; this is also why I brought this up on the site. I'm geniunely interested in people's definitions.

Thank you for responding.

[TheGrey]

Jim, I apologize for the font. I typed up my thoughts in Microsoft Word, and for some reason when I cut and pasted, the font and spacing went all screwy. I hope this helps, because I'd love to hear your opinion.


This is long, but hopefully coherent. I'd love to hear your thoughts!

During the latest gun-control flurries, I’ve watched the posts on this forum closely. I have learned a great deal from a lot of you, and I have both understood and empathized with the justifiable anger that’s been displayed.

One thing that I’ve noticed is a repeating pattern of “They’re taking away our rights!” being posted. But the context of the posts makes me wonder if the basics of “rights”and “freedom” are actually understood by some of the people that are on the fence, or that are okay with a little bit of freedom being nibbled away. Sometimes it’s difficult to break an idea down even further, to understand what’s at the root. I’m not suggesting it’s a matter of intellect; maybe it’s just a matterof thinking in a slightly different direction.

I am re-reading a science-fiction series by David Gerrold. The series will be seven novels(there are four so far,) collectively called “War Against the Cthorr.” Mr.Gerrold brings a lot of concepts to the forefront: the loss of freedoms, the concepts behind civics, service, the psychology of war and many others. Although I’ve read One Second After, this series of books is more real to me than OSA- they’re highly disturbing in the implications and deal with situations that are all-encompassing and intensely personal. He writes in much the same style as Robert Heinlein, and has dedicated the first book to the Heinleins (Starship Troopers, anyone?)

In the first book, “A Matter for Men,” the Global Ethics instructor defines the word ‘freedom’ as being responsible for your own actions. Free people seize and use opportunities in a responsible fashion.

‘Rights’ are a bit trickier to define. Many people I speak with have a tough timebreaking down ‘rights’; they think that because ‘rights’ are ‘guaranteed’ inthe Constitution, that’s as far as it goes. I know that was what I thought when I was growing up; that’s what my parents and teachers told me and I believed it was unassailable. We now know differently.

In the book, ‘rights’ are described as “That which is due aparty by just claim, legal guarantee, or moral principle.” Although there is an illusion of ownership granted through these rights, ownership is actually an illusion of control. Rights are essentially “the opportunity to be responsible for yourself.” Everything you need as a tool tomake the most of these rights means it is up to you.

Responsibility seems to be a reoccurring theme with these definitions. Responsible people are looked at as adult; responsible people often don’t require assistance because they have prepared for situations. They have wisdom and experience. They can reason. Responsible people do not want unwelcome advice, unwelcome rules that impose upon their plans, or aspersions cast by ignorant or inexperienced people.

Right now, our government is overreaching its original, intended purposes. Another definition provided in this book is that of the purpose of government. I will quote: “The only justifiable reason for a government to exist is to act on behalf of the member population in a delegated area of specific responsibility.” A delegated area of responsibility is anything that enough people are committed to, right or wrong. To me, that means that even if the recalls work, there is a chance that someone else just like that person will replace them unless we also take responsibility to insure this does not happen. It’s not something that we can continue to react, once per election cycle. It’s a long-term commitment to maintain our freedoms.

I’m very interested to hear your thoughts on defining ‘freedom,’‘rights,’ and ‘responsibility.’

[sroz]

Thanks, TheGrey. I think this is an excellent post. Very thought provoking. I may have to look into this series of novels.

[TheGrey]

Thank you, sroz. A couple of words of warning: this series is taking a LONG time for David Gerrold to write. You may have luck finding them in used book stores- they're not often found in Barnes & Noble.
It also deals with a lot of psychological trauma, with relation to survival and war. There's a number of places in the books that have haunted me, but they made me really ponder the implications. I consider it a fair trade.

[OtterbatHellcat]

Laws are being passed now that impinge upon our freedoms.

Yes, I know, and I'm not happy about most of that shit going on, and there's nothing I can do about it besides trying to elect someone who doesn't suck or contacting the spineless *representative* (and boy do I use that term loosely) to try and get them to change their view after the fact.

The future is in a very sad state of affairs, and there are too many sheep. What we really need is more gun control, because somebody must have shot all the wolves out of existence.

[TheGrey]

Freedom to me, is doing whatever the hell I want to do under the sun, as long as I don't break any laws in the process.....or infringe on anybody elses Rights at the same time. Rights to me, is kind of a touchy subject in general with a broad range of interpretation on either side of a given situation, even though they are clearly stated. Responsibility is a no brainer to me.

.

Let's expand on freedom. Let's say that I'm your neighbor. I've got a shed out back, and I have a chemistry lab. I'm dabbling, trying to create a new source of fuel. It's not against the law, as long as I obey the noise ordinance. Am I infriging upon your rights or freedoms?

(Please note that I'm not trying to quibble with you. :) )

[HoneyBadger]

Rights are not granted by other men. Rights are given to us by God. If you're not a fan of religion, then look at it this way: rights are natural and every human is born with them. Our US Bill of Rights was written to specifically protect Americans from having their natural rights infringed upon by their government or other people, regardless of the circumstance.

Here's something to ponder: You say that we already have unconstitutional legislation. I do not disagree. How long will the American people continue to allow the government to take away their rights? When will the people decide that they've had enough? What makes you think that they will?

[OtterbatHellcat]

I'll indulge the scenario presented to me.

Though I would think it quite weird that you had a chemical lab in a shed in your back yard....and presuming that you're not an "asshole" neighbor, and we get along well enough.... No, wouldn't bother me a bit. Hell, I'd probably hang out with ya and help if I could, or just B.S and all since we're friends and such. On the other hand, if you're a creepy fucker who acts weird most of the time, AND have that shit going on in your backyard....we just might have a problem.

Further, I would add that even if we were in the middle of that scenario somewhere, and I didn't know you very well....I would probably still ask you what the hell you're doing out there in your shed. If you hedged and hawed and looked like you were trying to bull shit me about something, I'd be contacting someone about your behavior or at least asking some other neighbors if they knew what was going on. Maybe I'm different, maybe I'm over cautious....either way, I don't want Ted Kaczynski for a neighbor.

But if you'd invite me over for steaks and beer once in a while, that would really help stuff out. ;)

[OtterbatHellcat]

HB, I'm not a god person, never will be.


How long will the American people continue to allow the government to take away their rights? When will the people decide that they've had enough? What makes you think that they will?

I have no idea why it hasn't happened yet, milquetoast pantywaist floor mats.....I'd like to see a better average American than what we have going on.

[OtterbatHellcat]

All the good ones that know what the hell stuff is about, are dying off in droves.....the Greatest Generation will be gone within a few years. Time outs, and Everybody is a Winner generation now, gentlemen.

[Great-Kazoo]

Right now, our government is overreaching its original,intended purposes. Another definition provided in this book is that of the purpose of government. I will quote: “The only justifiable reason for a government to exist is to act on behalf of the member population in a delegated area of specific responsibility.” A delegated area of responsibility is anything that enough people are committed to, right or wrong. To me, that means that even if the recalls work, there is a chance that someone else just like that person will replace them unless we also take responsibility to insure this does not happen. It’s not something that we can continue to react, once per election cycle. It’s a long-term commitment to maintain our freedoms.

First off thanks for the font resizing.

Regarding the recall effort and potential for getting someone just like them.

To me the recall effort is to give notice they person targeted Failed to listen to their "constituents". Their Hubris and feeling they and they alone know what is best for us is disgusting to say the least. They need to know We the People have options and not wait for the 14 election to remove them from office. There are consequences for their actions, as with everyone.


For the people sitting on the fence. If at this point in their life they have no clue and want someone to TELL Them how to vote and make a decision, they should be barred from voting ever again. Same for the "emotional Low information voter" on either side of the aisle. Research the issue at hand and form an opinion yourself.

Responsibility... How many have no clue or are even aware what Responsibility Means?? The education system has failed their students and families on so many levels as part of becoming PC and "Compassionate" The country as a whole has lost its way.
I will not say Moral Compass, because My Morality and yours are just that, our own way of living. I don't want someone pushing their morality on me and do not, or will not try and force mine on them.

[OtterbatHellcat]

x2

Nicely said, Jim.

[TheGrey]

I'll indulge the scenario presented to me.

Though I would think it quite weird that you had a chemical lab in a shed in your back yard....and presuming that you're not an "asshole" neighbor, and we get along well enough.... No, wouldn't bother me a bit. Hell, I'd probably hang out with ya and help if I could, or just B.S and all since we're friends and such. On the other hand, if you're a creepy fucker who acts weird most of the time, AND have that shit going on in your backyard....we just might have a problem.

Further, I would add that even if we were in the middle of that scenario somewhere, and I didn't know you very well....I would probably still ask you what the hell you're doing out there in your shed. If you hedged and hawed and looked like you were trying to bull shit me about something, I'd be contacting someone about your behavior or at least asking some other neighbors if they knew what was going on. Maybe I'm different, maybe I'm over cautious....either way, I don't want Ted Kaczynski for a neighbor.

But if you'd invite me over for steaks and beer once in a while, that would really help stuff out. ;)

:D
You are entirely too reasonable.

My weird scenario was supposed to elicit the typical "What? That's dangerous and I'm worried about my family!" reaction, at which I would point out that 'freedom' is one of those terms that many people often grant two definitions: how it affects themselves, and how it affects others. I don't see many people on this forum having many issues like that, so I guess it serves me right to stipulate this scenario. However, I've had some discussions with people that have a tough time defining 'freedom' and how it applies to everyone, which segues into the concept of 'rights'- and I've never been able to carry the conversation to how it applies to responsibility.

And if you were my neighbor, you bet we'd be having steaks and beer!

Honeybadger,

I wish with all my heart that there would be some sort of wake-up on behalf of the American people. I've been trying to figure out where things went downhill. At what point did America make a turn in the road, and begin embracing the concept of 'security' instead of 'liberty'?
As to your last question, I have to believe that they will. As long as there is breath in my body (and I also speak for my spouse in this,) America has a chance to return to her former glory. We have not yet begun to fight.

Jim,

Thank you for your reply. I think you've hit upon something- the whole PC movement certainly plays into this! But even more than that, the education system has failed us. When did our education start going downhill? What happened?

[roberth]

I like the direction this thread took. We have natural rights and those are re-enforced by the constitution. No other government on earth has ever recognized those rights, when These United States goes down, that'll be all she wrote.

The wake-up call will be when the government (federal, state, county, city) finally runs out of money for the parasites, then it will get real ugly, really fast. No one will be safe, not even the wealthy elites in their ivory towers.

We failed the education system by allowing the federal government to co-opt it a few decades ago.

[OtterbatHellcat]

The thread has a good question.

I was kinda wondering why there wasn't more response to it. Might be more topic than most folks really want to respond to, I dunno.

Thanks for the idea, Grey.

[ben4372]

Your font is too small to read the way it is. Please, make it larger for those of use who can't see. It looks like a run on sentence.
And it looks as it gets smaller as I read down. Did Willy Wonka write this post?

[TheGrey]

And it looks as it gets smaller as I read down. Did Willy Wonka write this post?

Ha! I don't know why it's doing that- I tried to resize it. That will teach me to type everything in word and then cut and paste.
Do you need it resized again?

[ben4372]

Thanks for noticing the part about 'as long as I don't break any laws in the process' . I read long ago and it's popped up in other reading, something about it being easier to rule 'criminals'. It is getting easier and easier to break the law, and TONS easier to get a felony.

[mtnhack]

HB, I'm not a god person, never will be. How long will the American people continue to allow the government to take away their rights? When will the people decide that they've had enough? What makes you think that they will? I have no idea why it hasn't happened yet, milquetoast pantywaist floor mats.....I'd like to see a better average American than what we have going on.This is the problem, it has been the gentle erosion of our rights that has turned into an absolute mudslide of the earth disappearing beneath our feet. Our society has bred the sheep that not only care less about yielding more of their rights and freedoms, but are crying out for assclown representatives to take more. If the citizenry as a whole were more educated, these people wouldn't have jobs, but as long as they do, there will be no end to the lengths they will go to seperate us from our rights.
There are a LOT of dystopian literary works, but I just finished watching A Handmaids Tale. The book was much better and very scary because of the realistic portrayal of the subjugation of an entire population.

[Troublco]

Freedom - the ability to live and do as you please, without negatively affecting others with your actions. (They have their right to freedom, too.) Or, the ability to succeed or fail by one's own actions, without interference. Or a combination of the two things.

With regard to laws, I personally do not believe that the simple act of a legislative body agreeing amongst themselves that their electorate should or shouldn't be able to (insert subject of law here) means that we are automatically bound by that law. I don't remember where I saw it, but I remember reading something to the effect that "A law repugnant to the Constitution is no law at all". I believe that is a good litmus by which to judge the works of a legislative body. Sort of along the lines of jury nullification, which is a taboo subject in any court of the land.

I like what roberth said. The Constitution does not grant rights, only reaffirms the rights we have naturally. But we only have what we are willing to work and/or sacrifice to keep.

You have to be able to think for yourself to be able to be free, too. And that is an ability that is becoming increasingly rare, with no help from the educational (I like to think of it as the Indoctrinational) system.

The point will come where people will have to decide if they are willing to sacrifice to be free, or instead willing to sacrifice freedom. Our founding fathers did this. Would we? Or do you suppose this is why veterans are considered to be potential "domestic terrorists"...because they have already indicated their willingness to give all for their country?

[TheGrey]

You all bring up some very good points. Our education has turned into indoctrination, and our rights have been slowly eroded until they've gained that slippery slope point. The "ruling class" continues to change the rules to suit their agenda, and changes definitions of once-familir terms.

The question is, what can we do about this?

[Dingo]

The question is, what can we do about this?

What all of us have already been doing - calling, writing, emailing, spreading the word to vote, preparing for the 2014 elections, and soothing our frustrations with that process by laying aside a massive stash of ammunition, magazines, and weapons for that rainy day which I doubt is more than 20 years away...

[BlasterBob]

this better? ;)
[ROFL1]