Does freedom really matter ?

N

NOVA

U. S. NAVY Veteran
Many ideas the liberals have forced on the population of the country do actual good for some people....
Seat belts do save lives and lessen injury for those that have accidents...
Helmets on Bicycle riders and motor cycle riders do at times prevent injury
Their war on cigarette and cigar smokers seems to have made a difference in the cancer stats....
Now they threaten to limit salt usage and fatty foods, etc. in an attempt to "help" us some more....
Mandatory restrictions are becoming to norm, not voluntary compliance....
We weren't asked to wear helmets, use seat belts, etc...we were forced..
for our own good they tell us....

Where does the intrusion in our lives end....?
Mandatory suntan oil for any one exposing themselves to the sun?
How about forcing us to take vitamins....?
Will we be forced to have flu shots every fall...?
Will mountain climbing and skydiving, auto racing and boxing be outlawed as too dangerous?
Will we be forced to eat our veggies every day?
Maybe driving on icy roads and going over 20 mph will become extinct.
Forced health checkups?.....Tofu burgers?....Happy meals banned....
When is enough, enough?

How much of our freedom will we have to give to the liberal gods that know what is best for us....who will hold our hand to cross the streets when they aren't around/ But then those annoying assholes seem to be always around .... like gnats and fleas and flies and roaches and ants....
 
Don't try to pin this one on the Liberals.the Conservatives have had just as influence in making laws that limit our freedom of choice.But children should have bicycle helmets and seat belts. And people who want to breath clean fresh air instead of toxic second hand tobacco smoke should have that right to.Helping people live better healthier lives is part of why we have a Government in the first place. But your right. Adults should have the right to choose for themselves,but with the stipulation that no one else is harmed because of that choice.
 
bravo said:
When is enough, enough?
Click to expand...

Answer: As soon as we know everything there is to know.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

bravo said:
Many ideas the liberals have forced on the population of the country do actual good for some people....
Seat belts do save lives and lessen injury for those that have accidents...
Helmets on Bicycle riders and motor cycle riders do at times prevent injury
Their war on cigarette and cigar smokers seems to have made a difference in the cancer stats....
Now they threaten to limit salt usage and fatty foods, etc. in an attempt to "help" us some more....
Mandatory restrictions are becoming to norm, not voluntary compliance....
We weren't asked to wear helmets, use seat belts, etc...we were forced..
for our own good they tell us....

Where does the intrusion in our lives end....?
Mandatory suntan oil for any one exposing themselves to the sun?
How about forcing us to take vitamins....?
Will we be forced to have flu shots every fall...?
Will mountain climbing and skydiving, auto racing and boxing be outlawed as too dangerous?
Will we be forced to eat our veggies every day?
Maybe driving on icy roads and going over 20 mph will become extinct.
Forced health checkups?.....Tofu burgers?....Happy meals banned....
When is enough, enough?

How much of our freedom will we have to give to the liberal gods that know what is best for us....who will hold our hand to cross the streets when they aren't around/ But then those annoying assholes seem to be always around .... like gnats and fleas and flies and roaches and ants....
Click to expand...
 
bravo said:
Many ideas the liberals have forced on the population of the country do actual good for some people....
Seat belts do save lives and lessen injury for those that have accidents...
Helmets on Bicycle riders and motor cycle riders do at times prevent injury
Their war on cigarette and cigar smokers seems to have made a difference in the cancer stats....
Now they threaten to limit salt usage and fatty foods, etc. in an attempt to "help" us some more....
Mandatory restrictions are becoming to norm, not voluntary compliance....
We weren't asked to wear helmets, use seat belts, etc...we were forced..
for our own good they tell us....

Where does the intrusion in our lives end....?
Mandatory suntan oil for any one exposing themselves to the sun?
How about forcing us to take vitamins....?
Will we be forced to have flu shots every fall...?
Will mountain climbing and skydiving, auto racing and boxing be outlawed as too dangerous?
Will we be forced to eat our veggies every day?
Maybe driving on icy roads and going over 20 mph will become extinct.
Forced health checkups?.....Tofu burgers?....Happy meals banned....
When is enough, enough?

How much of our freedom will we have to give to the liberal gods that know what is best for us....who will hold our hand to cross the streets when they aren't around/ But then those annoying assholes seem to be always around .... like gnats and fleas and flies and roaches and ants....
Click to expand...

where there is fear, there is no freedom

where there is no justice, there is no freedom

why do you not rail against the fear generated by your government or those seeking to control your government to control you
 
Last edited:
wanderingbear said:
Don't try to pin this one on the Liberals.the Conservatives have had just as influence in making laws that limit our freedom of choice.But children should have bicycle helmets and seat belts. And people who want to breath clean fresh air instead of toxic second hand tobacco smoke should have that right to.Helping people live better healthier lives is part of why we have a Government in the first place. But your right. Adults should have the right to choose for themselves,but with the stipulation that no one else is harmed because of that choice.
Click to expand...

but not children...
 
wanderingbear said:
Don't try to pin this one on the Liberals.the Conservatives have had just as influence in making laws that limit our freedom of choice.But children should have bicycle helmets and seat belts. And people who want to breath clean fresh air instead of toxic second hand tobacco smoke should have that right to.Helping people live better healthier lives is part of why we have a Government in the first place. But your right. Adults should have the right to choose for themselves,but with the stipulation that no one else is harmed because of that choice.
Click to expand...
Why not mention liberals? They are the ones that constantly take the credit for all these things and the positive effects they sometimes have, never pointing out their erosion on our rights.

I didn't mention children once in my post ....I'm talking about adults that should have the freedom to do whatever ever they please as long as it doesn't involve others people....
So your reference to children, clean air, and clean water and toxic smoke are all red herrings ....

Helping people live better healthier lives is part of why we have a Government in the first place.???

I beg to differ but thats another issue....government 'helping people lead better lives in one thing'....government FORCING people to live what they think are better lives, is quite another....
Like you admit....I am right....
Adults should have the right to choose for themselves,but with the stipulation that no one else is harmed because of that choice.

Maybe I just value my individual (personal) rights more than the average unthinking liberal....
 
wanderingbear said:
Don't try to pin this one on the Liberals.the Conservatives have had just as influence in making laws that limit our freedom of choice.But children should have bicycle helmets and seat belts. And people who want to breath clean fresh air instead of toxic second hand tobacco smoke should have that right to.Helping people live better healthier lives is part of why we have a Government in the first place. But your right. Adults should have the right to choose for themselves,but with the stipulation that no one else is harmed because of that choice.
Click to expand...
Apparently their parents cannot make choices, only parents you agree with can make choices and we must force other parents to comply with your choice.

It's none of the government's business to either tell me what foods I can eat or what I must do to save my soul or that of my child. These are our choices, the attempt to give that responsibility to the government because you agree disgusts me.

We've spent ever more time in either party suggesting it is okay so long as we agree. One side tries to save your soul, the other your body from your own decisions. We attempt to restrict marriages to coincide with the religious beliefs of one group, we attempt to restrict the diet of others to coincide with "what is good for you" for another group, we attempt to force people to act how we want at specific times because we "know" it is "good" for them, either for their salvation or for their longevity.

That isn't freedom. It's gross hypocrisy.
 
Damocles said:
Apparently their parents cannot make choices, only parents you agree with can make choices and we must force other parents to comply with your choice.

It's none of the government's business to either tell me what foods I can eat or what I must do to save my soul or that of my child. These are our choices, the attempt to give that responsibility to the government because you agree disgusts me.

We've spent ever more time in either party suggesting it is okay so long as we agree. One side tries to save your soul, the other your body from your own decisions. We attempt to restrict marriages to coincide with the religious beliefs of one group, we attempt to restrict the diet of others to coincide with "what is good for you" for another group, we attempt to force people to act how we want at specific times because we "know" it is "good" for them, either for their salvation or for their longevity.

That isn't freedom. It's gross hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

do you advocate the abolishment of the usda and fda?
 
bravo said:
Many ideas the liberals have forced on the population of the country do actual good for some people....
Seat belts do save lives and lessen injury for those that have accidents...
Helmets on Bicycle riders and motor cycle riders do at times prevent injury
Their war on cigarette and cigar smokers seems to have made a difference in the cancer stats....
Now they threaten to limit salt usage and fatty foods, etc. in an attempt to "help" us some more....
Mandatory restrictions are becoming to norm, not voluntary compliance....
We weren't asked to wear helmets, use seat belts, etc...we were forced..
for our own good they tell us....

Where does the intrusion in our lives end....?
Mandatory suntan oil for any one exposing themselves to the sun?
How about forcing us to take vitamins....?
Will we be forced to have flu shots every fall...?
Will mountain climbing and skydiving, auto racing and boxing be outlawed as too dangerous?
Will we be forced to eat our veggies every day?
Maybe driving on icy roads and going over 20 mph will become extinct.
Forced health checkups?.....Tofu burgers?....Happy meals banned....
When is enough, enough?

How much of our freedom will we have to give to the liberal gods that know what is best for us....who will hold our hand to cross the streets when they aren't around/ But then those annoying assholes seem to be always around .... like gnats and fleas and flies and roaches and ants....
Click to expand...

These are all very good points to ponder. As you note there are seemingly good results from some of this nanny state interference. The latest move in the Bay Area to ban Happy Meals however is a good example of the nanny state mentality running amok!
 
Athena said:
These are all very good points to ponder. As you note there are seemingly good results from some of this nanny state interference. The latest move in the Bay Area to ban Happy Meals however is a good example of the nanny state mentality running amok!
Click to expand...

they did not ban happy meals, just adding a toy to entice children to demand them
 
Don Quixote said:
do you advocate the abolishment of the usda and fda?
Click to expand...
No. That's a false analogy.

1. Is there a direct victim if I feed you food that is filled with Salmonella? Yes.
2. Is there one if I let you choose to buy unpoisoned food that if you eat too much of it may make you fat and sometimes prone to certain outcomes? No.

People can make these choices themselves, and if we are free we should be allowed to, just as a free people can choose to "sin" against "God" by getting married in ways not sanctioned by the religions of the majority. It is stupid to equate toys in a box with poisonous food and try to make it a moral equivalency so you can feel good about taking the choices away from others to fit in with what you think is right.

Sometimes freedom has costs, this attempt at perfect security over freedom is against everything I believe. Whether it is to save us from the "ick" factor of gay marriage, or if it is to save us from fat kids. This is a cost we should be more than willing to pay for freedom.
 
Damocles said:
Apparently their parents cannot make choices, only parents you agree with can make choices and we must force other parents to comply with your choice.

It's none of the government's business to either tell me what foods I can eat or what I must do to save my soul or that of my child. These are our choices, the attempt to give that responsibility to the government because you agree disgusts me.

We've spent ever more time in either party suggesting it is okay so long as we agree. One side tries to save your soul, the other your body from your own decisions. We attempt to restrict marriages to coincide with the religious beliefs of one group, we attempt to restrict the diet of others to coincide with "what is good for you" for another group, we attempt to force people to act how we want at specific times because we "know" it is "good" for them, either for their salvation or for their longevity.

That isn't freedom. It's gross hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's the Constitution or, more accurately, the reason for the Constitution. "promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,"

Promote the general welfare. Why do we teach children not to put their hand on the stove? Why do we punish a child if he/she runs in the street without looking? Why did everyone have to chip in to pay for rural electrification? Why do we all pay for streets and lighting?

If the roll of the Federal Government is strictly defense why any Federal laws concerning States? Why should Federal laws override State law? The answer is that's how a country is run.

As for knowing what's good for people it should only apply to things that can be proven which eliminates religion and souls. If something contributes to a healthier population isn't a healthy population necessary for a country to thrive? Doesn't health fall under the term of welfare? If a parent is responsible for a child's welfare that means they are responsible for the child's health. It must follow if the government's roll is to promote the general welfare and health is considered welfare then the question is what constitutes "promote".

Finally, when it comes to freedom and choices surely ones right to live or die is the most basic freedom so why are there laws against suicide or attempted suicide? If the purpose of the Federal Government is to ensure freedom, to promote freedom above general welfare, then not only should attempted suicide be legal but the government should be obliged to assist, where possible.

On that note it's lunch time here. :)
 
plastic-fast-food-toys.jpg
 
apple0154 said:
Actually, it's the Constitution or, more accurately, the reason for the Constitution. "promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,"

Promote the general welfare. Why do we teach children not to put their hand on the stove? Why do we punish a child if he/she runs in the street without looking? Why did everyone have to chip in to pay for rural electrification? Why do we all pay for streets and lighting?

If the roll of the Federal Government is strictly defense why any Federal laws concerning States? Why should Federal laws override State law? The answer is that's how a country is run.

As for knowing what's good for people it should only apply to things that can be proven which eliminates religion and souls. If something contributes to a healthier population isn't a healthy population necessary for a country to thrive? Doesn't health fall under the term of welfare? If a parent is responsible for a child's welfare that means they are responsible for the child's health. It must follow if the government's roll is to promote the general welfare and health is considered welfare then the question is what constitutes "promote".

Finally, when it comes to freedom and choices surely ones right to live or die is the most basic freedom so why are there laws against suicide or attempted suicide? If the purpose of the Federal Government is to ensure freedom, to promote freedom above general welfare, then not only should attempted suicide be legal but the government should be obliged to assist, where possible.

On that note it's lunch time here. :)
Click to expand...
My argument isn't about whether there is authority to do it, it is about whether we should exercise such authority in a free society. Your entire argument doesn't answer the central point.

Where is the victim? Why should we, as a free society, allow others to make these decisions for us? How can we possibly continue to call ourselves a free society when we have given over even the minutest of choices over to government to make us "secure", to "save" people from themselves?

And lastly, how can you so hypocritically suggest that taking away such choices isn't equivalent to taking away other choices to "protect" people from "unnatural" acts? They are the same, both are an attempt to "save" you from yourself and in agreement with the "majority". The Federal government shouldn't mess in this, but if we are to remain free we should insist that our local government step out of our business as well.
 
apple0154 said:
Actually, it's the Constitution or, more accurately, the reason for the Constitution. "promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,"

Promote the general welfare. Why do we teach children not to put their hand on the stove? Why do we punish a child if he/she runs in the street without looking? Why did everyone have to chip in to pay for rural electrification? Why do we all pay for streets and lighting?

More strawman crap....apples are oranges, men are women, up is down, streetlights are the blessings of Liberty, and left is right.....(in each case, a fallacy)....what total inane nonsense...:palm:

If the roll of the Federal Government is strictly defense why any Federal laws concerning States? Why should Federal laws override State law? The answer is that's how a country is run.

Exactly.....why indeed...?...could it be 100 years of liberal dogma creep?

As for knowing what's good for people it should only apply to things that can be proven which eliminates religion and souls. If something contributes to a healthier population isn't a healthy population necessary for a country to thrive? Doesn't health fall under the term of welfare? If a parent is responsible for a child's welfare that means they are responsible for the child's health. It must follow if the government's roll is to promote the general welfare and health is considered welfare then the question is what constitutes "promote".

Finally, when it comes to freedom and choices surely ones right to live or die is the most basic freedom so why are there laws against suicide or attempted suicide? If the purpose of the Federal Government is to ensure freedom, to promote freedom above general welfare, then not only should attempted suicide be legal but the government should be obliged to assist, where possible.

On that note it's lunch time here. :)
Click to expand...
.
 
apple0154 said:
Actually, it's the Constitution or, more accurately, the reason for the Constitution. "promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,"
Click to expand...

the framers would shoot you for even declaring that this clause could be used for any legislation whatsoever, if congress could just claim it's for the well being of society.

but then, you know that this interpretation is an abomination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top