• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When was America most free as a nation?

When was America most free as a nation?

  • Between the end of the Revolutionary War and the start of the Civil War?

    Votes: 13 23.2%

  • Between the end of the Civil War and the beginning of World War One?

    Votes: 3 5.4%

  • Between the end of WWI and the passage of the Civil Rights Act?

    Votes: 3 5.4%

  • Today, including the time after passage of the Civil Rights Act?

    Votes: 37 66.1%
  • Total voters
    56
Compared to the last forty years, I think the Iran negotiations are going quite well....

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/24/w...n-its-detonators-atomic-agency-says.html?_r=0
The disclosure was buried in a report by the atomic agency that detailed major progress Iran had made in diluting most of its stockpile of medium-enriched uranium, nuclear fuel that the West has long feared could be converted relatively quickly into weapons-grade material. Getting Iran to dilute that uranium was perhaps the biggest single accomplishment of the interim deal struck last year, creating room for the current negotiations, which hit their first major roadblock last week.....
Click to expand...

If Iran wasn't co-operating and meeting certain milestones there would have been any negotiations at all.


Araqchi who is the second-ranking person in the nuclear talks with the major powers (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany) said the Vienna talks neither failed nor ended in a deadlock.
Click to expand...
Iran will not give concessions: nuclear negotiator - Tehran Times


Arachi, Iran's second top negotiator said that "the Vienna talks neither failed nor ended in a deadlock." The next round of talks are scheduled to resume in mid June. But there are some people who don't seem to want the US to negotiate with Iran and keep trying to throw a monkey wrench into the talks......

Obama administration blasts Corker Amendment: We can
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Yeah, one side believes that freedom from discrimination is a right...while the other side seems to believe that freedom to discriminate is a right. At least that's what I gathered from my (quite unscientific) poll here on DP, where the "right to discriminate" was vociferously defended by those on the right...and ONLY those on the right.
Click to expand...
What about economic issues? What about gun rights? What about limiting political speech? Both sides support freedoms that the other side opposes.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
REALLY???? All your conservative friends want pot to be legalized for adults? ALL of them? Well, you DO live in New England. But let's see what the numbers say, shall we?

This Gallup poll says only 34% of conservatives and 35% of Republicans support legalization (as opposed to 69% of liberals)...

...but that poll is three years old. Let's look at some newer ones.

At the 2014 CPAC, 41% of Republicans supported legalization for all uses (and I assume that means by adults), while 52% said that they either supported it for medical uses or that it should remain illegal altogether.

Here's what a poll said about the opinion of Texas conservatives this past March:

Overall, 23 percent of Texas voters think that marijuana should be illegal in all circumstances, but opposition grows to 32 percent when we focus on Republican voters. Conversely, 77 percent of liberals think that small or large amounts of marijuana should be made legal for any purpose, but among conservatives, that support drops to 35 percent. Add the 32 percent of conservatives who would only legalize marijuana for medicinal purposes, and you see that the majority of the voters who drive elections in Texas remain clear-eyed in their opposition to recreational pot use.

But that's conservatives down in Texas, and they've often got a different outlook than conservatives up in New England, right? So here's what a poll found a few days ago in New York:

Support for recreational marijuana is also divided among political party lines. Democrats favor legalization by 62-32 percent and independent voters approve of it by 53-42 percent. Republicans polled, however, oppose it by 69-28 percent.

However, support for medical marijuana was strong for both parties. Republicans favor it by 74-23 percent, while Democrats are in favor by 87-12 percent.

So maybe all your personal conservative friends do support legalization for recreational purposes...but you and your friends are in the significant minority of conservatives overall, regardless of where you live. And then there's the small matter that there are precisely ZERO red states that are even seriously considering legalization.

So...yeah, it IS your side that's holding back legalization of marijuana for adults for recreational purposes. I've got no doubt that this will change, that support on your side will grow as the years pass - and more quickly than many expect. But for right now...no. There's too many old people driving your side's policies.
Click to expand...

Your post is way too long. Word of advice...make it shorter and then it makes it worth reading.

I don't have a "side", for the second time.

Nope, I never met a fellow conservative who opposes the legalization of pot for adults.

Polls in Texas are irrelevant to me.
 
tres borrachos said:
Your post is way too long. Word of advice...make it shorter and then it makes it worth reading.

I don't have a "side", for the second time.

Nope, I never met a fellow conservative who opposes the legalization of pot for adults.

Polls in Texas are irrelevant to me.
Click to expand...

And the poll in NY is irrelevant, and so is the nationwide poll, and any other hard numbers shown to you...and the simple fact that the number of conservative states that are even considering legalization of marijuana is ZERO.

You really do have a problem with numbers, huh?

Like I said, I honestly don't doubt what you say about what your particular circle of conservative friends think - that's within the statistical margin of error that you and your particular group agree on legalization of marijuana. BUT when the bigger picture is examined - AWAY from your particular group of conservatives - we see a completely different set of numbers...and those numbers CLEARLY show that the set of American citizens who most strongly oppose legalization of marijuana are CONSERVATIVE, and that the ones who most strongly support it are LIBERAL.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
And the poll in NY is irrelevant, and so is the nationwide poll, and any other hard numbers shown to you...and the simple fact that the number of conservative states that are even considering legalization of marijuana is ZERO.

You really do have a problem with numbers, huh?

Like I said, I honestly don't doubt what you say about what your particular circle of conservative friends think - that's within the statistical margin of error that you and your particular group agree on legalization of marijuana. BUT when the bigger picture is examined - AWAY from your particular group of conservatives - we see a completely different set of numbers...and those numbers CLEARLY show that the set of American citizens who most strongly oppose legalization of marijuana are CONSERVATIVE, and that the ones who most strongly support it are LIBERAL.
Click to expand...

Fascinating.

And?
 
Glen Contrarian said:
And the poll in NY is irrelevant, and so is the nationwide poll, and any other hard numbers shown to you...and the simple fact that the number of conservative states that are even considering legalization of marijuana is ZERO.

You really do have a problem with numbers, huh?

Like I said, I honestly don't doubt what you say about what your particular circle of conservative friends think - that's within the statistical margin of error that you and your particular group agree on legalization of marijuana. BUT when the bigger picture is examined - AWAY from your particular group of conservatives - we see a completely different set of numbers...and those numbers CLEARLY show that the set of American citizens who most strongly oppose legalization of marijuana are CONSERVATIVE, and that the ones who most strongly support it are LIBERAL.
Click to expand...

and the ones who support gun rights are conservative. The ones who support marriage rights and reproductiver rights are liberals. The ones who support all of the above, along with legalization of pot, oppose the Patriot Act and asset forfeiture, are the libertarians.

Now, who is the most pro liberty?
 
American said:
What does this have to do with the discussion?
Click to expand...

The question was, "When was America most free as a nation". If the question was referring the the United States, it is important to point out that the United States are a federation of sovereign states, not a nation.
 
Green Man said:
The question was, "When was America most free as a nation". If the question was referring the the United States, it is important to point out that the United States are a federation of sovereign states, not a nation.
Click to expand...

You mean since the Confederacy won the civil war?
 
Dittohead not! said:
and the ones who support gun rights are conservative. The ones who support marriage rights and reproductiver rights are liberals. The ones who support all of the above, along with legalization of pot, oppose the Patriot Act and asset forfeiture, are the libertarians.

Now, who is the most pro liberty?
Click to expand...

Really? You mean like alleged uber-libertarian Ron Paul supports gay marriage rights and abortion rights? Oh, wait - he doesn't. And if you'll check, 80% of libertarians vote Republican.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Was it before the Civil War, or before WWI, or before the Civil Rights Act, or today?

And why do you think so?
Click to expand...

Before the War of Northern (and Mexican) Aggression, because we done had the right to own peoples... and they done liked it!

Next, on Duck Dynasty...
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Really? You mean like alleged uber-libertarian Ron Paul supports gay marriage rights and abortion rights? Oh, wait - he doesn't. And if you'll check, 80% of libertarians vote Republican.
Click to expand...
It's true that that word is misused, but if someone truly is a libertarian, they support freedom more than liberals or conservatives do. To disagree with that is to disagree with the dictionary.
 
Wouldn't it have been easier to just ask if you're a conservative or liberal?
 
Those who demand that the federal government enforce 'freedom' by mandating a particular stance on a social issue are not people who understand or promote freedom. Such people support a return to tyranny. The Founders understood that.

Those who understand freedom understand the following:

1. A free people has a central government that enacts sufficent law and regulation to promote the general (everybody's) welfare, that allows the several states to function as one nation, and to prevent the several states from doing violence to each other.

2. A free people has a central government that provides the common defense and secures the unalienable rights of the people.

3. A free people is then free to live their lives as they choose and form whatever sorts of societies they wish to have.

There is no freedom in anarchy.

There is no freedom when the government dictates the rights that the people will have.

There is no freedom when the government dictates social policy for everybody.

So we had great freedom up until around the end of the 19th century and in the first decades of the 20th century. But Teddy Roosevelt turned the Constitution on its head by giving the federal government powers it had never been allowed. And that started a snowball rolling that has been gaining mass and speed ever since. And we now have a federal government that increasingly dictates what rights and property we are allowed to have and what policies we are required to incorporate into our societies, and who and what we are allowed to be.
 
Other: It was never a free nation and is not a free nation now. The idea of a "free nation" is more of an oxymoron than any reachable truth. There has not been one state, that I can think of off the top of my head, that I would assign the term "free". I guess, if you wanted an answer to it, the US was the "most free" under the Articles of Confederation however there are very obvious objections to the ie slavery (duh) and very limited voting rights.

To go through all the periods and why I would not consider them free:

Revolution to Civil War: I answered part above. Another example would be the Alien and Sedition Acts. Very unfree idea. Jackson's Trail of Tears idea certainly is not something that comes to mind when talking about freedom. High tariffs were also prominent in this period. Economic freedom is just as important as social and political freedom

Civil War to WWI: very pro-business government. Workers lived in **** conditions until the progressives who were also filled with eugenicists. WWI was not something that I would consider a war congruent with defense. There's evidence that we were warned that the Lusitania was going down but WW did nothing. Also saw the introduction of the Fed in this period. Poor idea from the jump. Another war was the Spanish-American (Imperialist) conflict where we siezed the Phillipines. Empires are never free. Still poor voting rights (women).

WWI to Civil Rights: Well Keynes happened in here. He certainly wasn't a champion of economic freedom. Cold War was here too. Too much propaganda to know left from right. And of course, social freedom was limited until the Civil Rights movement which I will admit was a bright spot in American History. We at least tried to get something right; get a single, quiet clap for that one. Can't forget the Red Scare and how that really narrowed down journalism with the blacklisting and such. Vietnam, Korea, every other conflict we were entangled in unnecessarily. Not free if you ask me

Today: HAHAHAHAHA. You made a funny I like you. I will only write three specific pieces of legislation to make my case here: "Patriot" Act, Bush's "Constitution free zones", and NDAA2012-present. Of course there are other examples I can think of including but certainly not limited to the continued use of Gitmo, domestic surveillance, police militarization, etc etc etc. The list could go on for pages.


Note: I didn't proofread. If there's a mistake I'll edit it out
 
TheLastIndependent said:
Other: It was never a free nation and is not a free nation now. The idea of a "free nation" is more of an oxymoron than any reachable truth. There has not been one state, that I can think of off the top of my head, that I would assign the term "free". I guess, if you wanted an answer to it, the US was the "most free" under the Articles of Confederation however there are very obvious objections to the ie slavery (duh) and very limited voting rights.

To go through all the periods and why I would not consider them free:

Revolution to Civil War: I answered part above. Another example would be the Alien and Sedition Acts. Very unfree idea. Jackson's Trail of Tears idea certainly is not something that comes to mind when talking about freedom. High tariffs were also prominent in this period. Economic freedom is just as important as social and political freedom

Civil War to WWI: very pro-business government. Workers lived in **** conditions until the progressives who were also filled with eugenicists. WWI was not something that I would consider a war congruent with defense. There's evidence that we were warned that the Lusitania was going down but WW did nothing. Also saw the introduction of the Fed in this period. Poor idea from the jump. Another war was the Spanish-American (Imperialist) conflict where we siezed the Phillipines. Empires are never free. Still poor voting rights (women).

WWI to Civil Rights: Well Keynes happened in here. He certainly wasn't a champion of economic freedom. Cold War was here too. Too much propaganda to know left from right. And of course, social freedom was limited until the Civil Rights movement which I will admit was a bright spot in American History. We at least tried to get something right; get a single, quiet clap for that one. Can't forget the Red Scare and how that really narrowed down journalism with the blacklisting and such. Vietnam, Korea, every other conflict we were entangled in unnecessarily. Not free if you ask me

Today: HAHAHAHAHA. You made a funny I like you. I will only write three specific pieces of legislation to make my case here: "Patriot" Act, Bush's "Constitution free zones", and NDAA2012-present. Of course there are other examples I can think of including but certainly not limited to the continued use of Gitmo, domestic surveillance, police militarization, etc etc etc. The list could go on for pages.


Note: I didn't proofread. If there's a mistake I'll edit it out
Click to expand...

Except that NOW, LGBT's no longer have to hide in the closet or get fired or beaten or worse. NOW - and since the Civil Rights Act - blacks and other nonwhites are no longer subject to Jim Crow. NOW, women are more likely to be paid equal wages for equal work...but the Right is still putting the kibosh on anything legal to back that up. NOW, one doesn't get thrown in jail just for saying that we shouldn't be at war with whatever nation we're attacking. And if you think that the police are more violent now than at any time before the 1970's, you've got a LOT of history-learnin' to do.

Don't get me wrong - our privacy is very much at stake, Gitmo (thanks to the Republicans in the House who won't let them go) is a perversion of American values, and there's the whole laundry list of other problems to which you alluded (not the least of which is our prison population). But right now, a greater percentage of Americans are freer than ever before.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Except that NOW, LGBT's no longer have to hide in the closet or get fired or beaten or worse. NOW - and since the Civil Rights Act - blacks and other nonwhites are no longer subject to Jim Crow. NOW, women are more likely to be paid equal wages for equal work...but the Right is still putting the kibosh on anything legal to back that up. NOW, one doesn't get thrown in jail just for saying that we shouldn't be at war with whatever nation we're attacking. And if you think that the police are more violent now than at any time before the 1970's, you've got a LOT of history-learnin' to do.

Don't get me wrong - our privacy is very much at stake, Gitmo (thanks to the Republicans in the House who won't let them go) is a perversion of American values, and there's the whole laundry list of other problems to which you alluded (not the least of which is our prison population). But right now, a greater percentage of Americans are freer than ever before.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can trade freedom and act like something has been gained. Yes, it is now a much better place for "protected groups" (too lazy to list them) and that is a great thing that I support 100%. Economic freedom is absolutely poor and political freedom is worse. So yeah, two guys can get married but you can't make a decent living, buy a house, start a family, and vote for someone who is not paid for by a corporation that needs the government it buys to survive. From my point of view, that's not much of an improvement.

And yes, there are several other threats to freedom that exist today. Of course, I felt that the examples I listed were enough to draw a strong case. It can all be summed up with a single sentence: Our government does not respect the sovereignty of person(s) or other nations. That alone is anti-freedom

Although, I will make it absolutely clear that I think all human's rights movements that have had success are great things.
 
Green Man said:
The United States are not a nation. They are a federation of sovereign states.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. We are a nation. Americans, within the 50 states share a common identity and governmental structure.
 
TheLastIndependent said:
I don't think you can trade freedom and act like something has been gained. Yes, it is now a much better place for "protected groups" (too lazy to list them) and that is a great thing that I support 100%. Economic freedom is absolutely poor and political freedom is worse. So yeah, two guys can get married but you can't make a decent living, buy a house, start a family, and vote for someone who is not paid for by a corporation that needs the government it buys to survive. From my point of view, that's not much of an improvement.

And yes, there are several other threats to freedom that exist today. Of course, I felt that the examples I listed were enough to draw a strong case. It can all be summed up with a single sentence: Our government does not respect the sovereignty of person(s) or other nations. That alone is anti-freedom

Although, I will make it absolutely clear that I think all human's rights movements that have had success are great things.
Click to expand...

Y'know, if you think we're not free, I'd recommend that you get out and travel the world a bit, get to know the locals and listen to their stories (and I have done this)...and then maybe you'd find out just how free you really are.

Again, we're not perfect - we're far from it. I especially hate how the conservatives on the Supreme Court have sent us (and perhaps irrevocably) down the road to oligarchy. But anyone who thinks that America's not free...simply has no idea what life is like where there's far less freedom, where people can only dream of the individual rights we have.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Y'know, if you think we're not free, I'd recommend that you get out and travel the world a bit, get to know the locals and listen to their stories (and I have done this)...and then maybe you'd find out just how free you really are.

Again, we're not perfect - we're far from it. I especially hate how the conservatives on the Supreme Court have sent us (and perhaps irrevocably) down the road to oligarchy. But anyone who thinks that America's not free...simply has no idea what life is like where there's far less freedom, where people can only dream of the individual rights we have.
Click to expand...

I am not saying that we are less free than any other nation. That would be silly. I have enough world knowledge to know the world is full of plight. We are also not the most free nation by individual measures and we are certainly not the best unless you equate military spending with grandeur... But is being a house slave instead of a field slave all that grand?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom