Freedom and what it means to Americans

[underdawg]

the condition of being free; the power to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints

A political condition that permits freedom of choice and action for individuals and also for individuals and groups to participate in the decisions and operation of the society and the political system.

Complex philosophical concept referring to an individual or group's ability, right, or possibility of self-determination or political independence. Often associated to the concept of human free will, our individual capacity to choose our own destiny rather then follow the dictates of others, nature, or even supernatural forces.

I just chose some random definitions that expresses my view of freedom, but for some reason I have a feeling that a lot of Americans think that freedom means something completely different that it does to me. Maybe they do agree with the standard definitions, but actually want people to have as little freedom as possible.

Soldiers claim to be fighting for our freedom, but I believe freedom is fought for here in this country by trying to express it. After 9-11 people said that the terrorists were jealous of our freedom, yet those same people supported efforts to limit certain freedoms for Americans such as trying to stop gay marriage, saying that it was wrong to speak out against a war we believe to be wrong and that they support legislation to prevent flag buring.

It is my opinion that Conservatives love to use the word freedom and love to wave the flag that supposedly represents freedom, and likes the sound of the word, yet in reality, I think they believe that freedom should be severely limited and certainly so for those they disagree with.

My question would be, what does freedom mean to you?

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

freedom means even liberals have the right to criticizes conservatives for expressing themselves, no matter how little sense they make doing it.

Some people hate freedom while they pretend to champion it, they want to take away the freedom of the majority to define marriage as they see fit for instance.

[underdawg]

Yes, lets talk about the freedom of the majority. What does that mean to everyone else that believe something different. Should the minority always suffer their loss of freedom because of what the majorty thinks? Does that truely make a country free or just give power to those in control?

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Should a minority be able to usurp the freedom of a majority? That doesn't make any sense.

[underdawg]

Only when the majority try to use their freedom to try to limit the rights of the minority.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Only when the majority try to use their freedom to try to limit the rights of the minority.


Like putting criminals in prison for instance?

[underdawg]

That is only after they used their free will to harm others. As far as the definition of marriage goes, it is not taking anyone's freedom away if someone else defines marriage differently than you do. It is counter to freedom to deny somone else the ability to define marriage for themselves.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

That is only after they used their free will to harm others. As far as the definition of marriage goes, it is not taking anyone's freedom away if someone else defines marriage differently than you do. It is counter to freedom to deny somone else the ability to define marriage for themselves.


No one is saying you can't define any word any way you want to, if you want to define marriage as between an avocado and a penguin, feel free. In fact film that marriage and put it on youtube and post the link, I'll watch it.

[underdawg]

Then if your last statement is true, and we can define marriage anyway we want to, then how we take away the freedom of the majority to define marriage for themselves? You can think what you want also. Conservatives actually want to prevent us from having a marriage as we define it for ourselves. We do not try to prevent you from having a marriage that you envision for yourselves.


Fleamonkey wrote:
"Some people hate freedom while they pretend to champion it, they want to take away the freedom of the majority to define marriage as they see fit for instance."

[micfranklin]

Freedom, to me, pretty much means being free to do whatever as long as it doesn't put anyone in danger or do harm to someone else.

For example, flag burning is essentially being free to do so without being shot dead by your government for whatever reason...as long as it's your flag you are burning.

[underdawg]

This topic is not limited to gay marriage. Is is about the freedom to do to your own body as you see fit without government interference such as abortion and drug laws. It is about the right to express yourself politically such as burning the flag, speaking out against the administration. I say that conservatives are more against freedom for all compared to liberals.

[micfranklin]

When it comes to drugs, I think that the government should have NO right to interfere with that: my body, my life, my choice. The government supposedly wants to protect you from other people and other people from you....but not you from you, and plus by letting them do this they get to dictate what they think is best for other people.

[gpruitt54]

I’ve heard it said that in a system where majority rules, 51 percent could impose its will on the remaining 49 percent. But we live in a Representative Republic, and that means that 99 percent cannot impose its will on the remaining 1 percent. That 1 percent has rights that 99 percent cannot infringe upon.

I do not believe that homosexual lifestyle (as abhorrent as it is) is not entitled to any special treatment, though they are indeed held in a favored status.

But because of our form of government (and that God for it), a majority cannot, and must, not impose its well on those of any minority.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

But because of our form of government (and that God for it), a majority cannot, and must, not impose its well on those of any minority.


Huh? Majority imposes it will on minority all the time in this country. I can't even count the referendums and amendments that have been voted on in recent years, all of them resulting in majority imposing it's will on minority.

[underdawg]

The majority does have the right to impose its will as far as collecting taxes, regulating traffic, running the government, or how they deal with people doing harm to other people, but limiting the person freedoms of individuals to do as they please is not their right according to the constitution.

[underdawg]

I wonder how many people believe that our personal freedoms should be limited or determined by what the majority thinks?

[firefox]

Democracy is not freedom! (http://www.democracyisnotfreedom.com) To me, freedom is wherever the state is not.

[NortheastCynic]

Freedom to me is being able to engage in any activity that does not infringe upon the rights of others. Democracy is not condusive to freedom because democracy allows the majority to tyranize the minority, as Firefox and MicFranklin are alluding to. A Republic, like the one we're supposed to have is ultimately the most pro-freedom form of government available. Unfortunately both sides of the spectrum have used populist "let the people vote" schemes on isses that should not be voted upon. Oh well.

-NC

[micfranklin]

I wonder how many people believe that our personal freedoms should be limited or determined by what the majority thinks?


I do not, for one, as that would lead to tyranny.

[Nemo]

This topic has become a debate over what it means to be an American, what our parties stand for, and, ultimately, what we stand for.Â*Â*Are we a democracy?Â*Â*Does America stand for freedom and equality?Â*Â*Is ours a truly representative form of government? Freedom and equality are ideals; but, absent a perfect world, no one can live in society and be entirely free or completely equal. For every freedom there is a corresponding obligation to others, and equality is limited to the extent that such obligations are mutual, and others do not demand rights without responsibility for their exercise. In this, the promise of America is not freedom and equality, but rather liberty and equal opportunity and justice under law.Â*Â*Still, such promise cannot be kept when government instituted by men favors the few in derogation of the many, or serves the special interests at the expense of the public interest, and when the rich and powerful can have more justice than the poor and oppressed. American is a nation of laws and not men. But the law can be both used and abused by men; and so it is the duty and responsibility of every citizen to oversee those who make and enforce the laws and administer justice.

[firefox]

Damn Nemo! Did you come up with that yourself? If so, it really kicks ASCII, congrats! If not, great copy/paste skills :). These are some very important and throught provoking observations. To me, freedom is not an absence of obligations, but rather a network of obligations in which you, the individual, are in control.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

I wonder how many people believe that our personal freedoms should be limited or determined by what the majority thinks?


I think most people would agree it's better than freedom being dictated by a minority.

[underdawg]

Wait till the muslims or some other group that you disagree with become the majority in this country and see if you feel differently.

[Elrathin]

I think most people would agree it's better than freedom being dictated by a minority.


Until they become the minority.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

I think most people would agree it's better than freedom being dictated by a minority.


Until they become the minority.


Well, even then in many circumstances they likely would recognize that the needs of the many must outweigh the needs of the few, unless they were very selfish people.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Wait till the muslims or some other group that you disagree with become the majority in this country and see if you feel differently.


Why single out the muslims? What are you saying about them as a group? That they are bad people?

[underdawg]

No, only that they they would think differently than you do making you part of a minority.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

No, only that they they would think differently than you do


In what way? Are you saying there is some difference in how Muslims think compared to normal people?

[underdawg]

Yeah, they worship Allah, and Mohammed and not Jesus.

[NortheastCynic]

Flea, freedom isn't dictated by the majority or the minority, it's dictated by law [i.e. the Constitution], no group of people, minority or majority can legally or morally dictate freedom.

-NC

[micfranklin]

I don't know why but many Americans seem to think freedom means something you can sacrifice for security.

[Nemo]

Benjamin Franklin is reputed to have said: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety.â€� This quote was used as a motto on the title page of An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania (1759), which was attributed to Franklin in the edition of 1812; however, in a letter to David Hume of September 27, 1760 regarding the publication of the First Edition, he denied that he wrote it.Â*Â*One might credit it a good motto even without the attribution to Franklin.Â*Â*Contrariwise, Hobbes maintained that men readily trade their liberty, the freedom to do as they wish, for security. See Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (1660).Â*Â*And, one need only look to the Patriot Act of 2001 and the Military Commissions Act of 2006 to see that this is true.

[Thirdparty]

Benjamin Franklin is reputed to have said: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety.â€� This quote was used as a motto on the title page of An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania (1759), which was attributed to Franklin in the edition of 1812; however, in a letter to David Hume of September 27, 1760 regarding the publication of the First Edition, he denied that he wrote it.Â*Â*One might credit it a good motto even without the attribution to Franklin.Â*Â*Contrariwise, Hobbes maintained that men readily trade their liberty, the freedom to do as they wish, for security. See Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (1660).Â*Â*And, one need only look to the Patriot Act of 2001 and the Military Commissions Act of 2006 to see that this is true.


Nemo, I am curious, how have you lost liberty or freedom due to the Patriot Act or MCA?

[NortheastCynic]

ThirdParty, I know you asked Nemo the question, but I hope you don't mind if I jump in.

It is irrelevant whether or not we personally have lost freedoms due to the USA PATRIOT ACT, the point is that within the context of the law [portions of which have been ruled unConstitutional], the Federal government CAN take away our freedoms without due process. I think that's the point Nemo is trying to make, correct me if I'm wrong Nemo.

-NC

[Nemo]

Here is the latest:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/16380470.htm

President Bush's so-called "signing statements" constitute an abuse of executive power.Â*Â*They are contrary to the law, and an infringement on our individual liberty.