RE: The You Can't Make This Shit Up Department
July 12, 2014 at 9:44 am
(This post was last modified: July 12, 2014 at 9:47 am by Jenny A.)
Blackout, Losty has hit on something very important:
Where the line should be drawn depends on the liberty. Some liberties are not only necessary to democracy, but suppressing them allows more liberties to be taken more easily.
Suppressing theft or murder, or to be a little less inflammatory the right to drive a car on the left side of the road, does not make it easier to restrict other things. Nor does suppressing theft, murder, or the driving on the left make it particularly more difficult to discuss when we might allow murder, theft, or driving on the left. Suppressing free speech, the right to freedom of association, freedom to protest or the right to vote, on the other hand all make it harder for those who seek change to achieve it and easier for the government in power to restrict other freedoms. Therefore the line should be drawn closer to freedom in these cases even if there some risk of personal security.
(July 12, 2014 at 8:05 am)Losty Wrote: No it does not make us more free. It makes us safer. There is a difference. We have to sacrifice some freedoms for safety, sacrificing those freedoms doesn't make us freer (is that a word?) it just gives us more security. That doesn't make it wrong it just means we have less freedoms in exchange for more safety. The trick is drawing the line in the right spot.
Where the line should be drawn depends on the liberty. Some liberties are not only necessary to democracy, but suppressing them allows more liberties to be taken more easily.
Suppressing theft or murder, or to be a little less inflammatory the right to drive a car on the left side of the road, does not make it easier to restrict other things. Nor does suppressing theft, murder, or the driving on the left make it particularly more difficult to discuss when we might allow murder, theft, or driving on the left. Suppressing free speech, the right to freedom of association, freedom to protest or the right to vote, on the other hand all make it harder for those who seek change to achieve it and easier for the government in power to restrict other freedoms. Therefore the line should be drawn closer to freedom in these cases even if there some risk of personal security.
If there is a god, I want to believe that there is a god. If there is not a god, I want to believe that there is no god.