• 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!

Do governments restrict freedom or provide it?

Do Governments Restrict Freedom or Provide It?

  • I lean right and govt restricts freedom.

    Votes: 18 64.3%

  • I lean left and govt restricts freedom.

    Votes: 8 28.6%

  • I lean right and govt does NOT restrict freedom.

    Votes: 2 7.1%

  • I lean left and govt does NOT restrict freedom.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I am not American and govt restricts freedom.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I am not American and govt does NOT restrict freedom.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    28
Do governments restrict freedom or provide it?
Click to expand...

both. the balance depends on the specific government that you're referring to.

also, the way the question is worded is too generic. for examples, corporations have lost the freedom to dump chemicals into rivers that caused them to catch on fire. had the population lost freedom of the press, that would be something else entirely. both would be a loss of freedom; one is completely necessary and benefits all of us.
 
US Conservative said:
It was intended to establish a baseline in my poll, take a look its done that. There are reasons why I do what I do. :2wave:
Click to expand...

My point was that one can claim these things are real, they can be of the opinion that these things are real, but without being able to actually demonstrate that these things are real, there really isn't much of an intelligent, rational discussion that can go on about these things in the real world. So long as it remains wishful thinking, you can talk about it hypothetically, but it really has no real-world application.
 
Cephus said:
My point was that one can claim these things are real, they can be of the opinion that these things are real, but without being able to actually demonstrate that these things are real, there really isn't much of an intelligent, rational discussion that can go on about these things in the real world. So long as it remains wishful thinking, you can talk about it hypothetically, but it really has no real-world application.
Click to expand...

I disagree and see philosophy in general and political philosophy to have implications daily.
 
KevinKohler said:
What about the merriam dictionary is uneducated? Define educated?
Click to expand...

It doesn't accurately describe the situation. Government is an organization of the predatory process and totalitarian control by political means over a given territorial area.

Our government is a coming together of people. There are 350,000,000 US citizens, give or take. There are, what, less than 10,000,000 government employees? Even less if you only count the leaders. At any point, any day of the week, any time of day, should the vast majority of people no longer consent, they can, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
Click to expand...

No, government is not about people coming together. When the government decided you were under their authority when you were born did you come together with those in government to make that decision? No, they decided it for you and ever since that day you have been under their command. Does the government have any real idea how many people consent to their governance or not? How many people were offered a choice to live in this land and not consent to be governed? That would be grand total of zero, yes? If someone comes to live in this land they MUST consent to the governing organization and follow their command thereafter or face fines, imprisonment, forced labor, or even death. Hell, in this country you're forced into labor as a condition for doing certain things like making a living or owning a home or if you want to open a business. In short, no one has a choice in the matter, so there is no "coming together of people". Your whole line of reasoning is based on a falsehood.

Your problem is, the vast, over whelming majority of people, while maybe not HAPPY with the way things currently are, are still fine with the government they've got.
Click to expand...

You have no idea if that claim of yours is true or not.
 
Henrin said:
You mean like your belief that people have a right to commence in commerce with unwilling parties?
Click to expand...

No, more in the way that religious and non-religious extremists do not discriminate people who have the right to shop where they want (when it comes to essential businesses that the government has regulated as being essential/public accommodation businesses).
 
Peter King said:
No, more in the way that religious and non-religious extremists do not discriminate people who have the right to shop where they want (when it comes to essential businesses that the government has regulated as being essential/public accommodation businesses).
Click to expand...

The right to shop where you want calls for other peoples freedom to be violated. Otherwise, people could refuse to commence in commerce with you for any reason what so ever and you're so called right goes out the window. You might not know this, but all positive right declarations call for a violation of someones liberty.
 
US Conservative said:
Rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Natural and legal rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Natural law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement;


That is the very first line, of the very first link you provided. Nature does not recognize ethics. Nature does not adhere to legality, beyond the basic laws of physics. Nature DOES have social constructs, by which I mean, many species of animals form packs, instinctively.
 
Henrin said:
It doesn't accurately describe the situation. Government is an organization of the predatory process and totalitarian control by political means over a given territorial area.



No, government is not about people coming together. When the government decided you were under their authority when you were born did you come together with those in government to make that decision? No, they decided it for you and ever since that day you have been under their command. Does the government have any real idea how many people consent to their governance or not? How many people were offered a choice to live in this land and not consent to be governed? That would be grand total of zero, yes? If someone comes to live in this land they MUST consent to the governing organization and follow their command thereafter or face fines, imprisonment, forced labor, or even death. Hell, in this country you're forced into labor as a condition for doing certain things like making a living or owning a home or if you want to open a business. In short, no one has a choice in the matter, so there is no "coming together of people". Your whole line of reasoning is based on a falsehood.



You have no idea if that claim of yours is true or not.
Click to expand...

So....you disagree with a definition from merriam, and are therefor right?
 
KevinKohler said:
Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement;


That is the very first line, of the very first link you provided. Nature does not recognize ethics. Nature does not adhere to legality, beyond the basic laws of physics. Nature DOES have social constructs, by which I mean, many species of animals form packs, instinctively.
Click to expand...

Ok, so I know you didn't read what I posted, but YES, they are ETHICAL. In this context, you are now attempting to ascribe ethical context to animals. My point on animals and natural law was NOT that animals think about these things, its that these laws manifest universally and are therefore natural. :lol:
 
Cephus said:
This stuff is so basic, I will never understand how so many people can be totally clueless about it.
Click to expand...

Show me how basic it is.
 
Only government can put up a fence and legally shoot you if you cross it.
 
US Conservative said:
How does the govt GET that tax money to pay for those children?
Click to expand...

Through taxes but that restriction of having to pay taxes is much less then restriction then the restictions children have if they not get a good education. My country Sweden is one of the most left leaning western democracies with one of the worlds highest taxrates. Still people in sweden have the freedom to become rich and in some cases become billionaires. That for example the swedish entrepreneur that created Skype have earned billions of dollar. Maybee he would never have had that chance if sweden didn't have good free of charge school up and including free univerities? That my country Sweden and other welfare state have much greater social mobility than for example USA.

Also high taxes can also create alot of benefits to the entire society. For example heavily subsided good daycare centers make both parents have the freedom to make a career and also provide a safe and good enviroment for the children. Also for example universal healthcare leads to a more productive and healthy society. Also a unemployed person or a person with a unskilled work have much larger freedom to better his position and contribute to society if he/she can be healtthy and get medicial treatment if needed.
 
Last edited:
US Conservative said:
Ok, so I know you didn't read what I posted, but YES, they are ETHICAL. In this context, you are now attempting to ascribe ethical context to animals. My point on animals and natural law was NOT that animals think about these things, its that these laws manifest universally and are therefore natural. :lol:
Click to expand...


How do they manifest universally? Where is this natural manifestation of ethics occurring?

Ethics, as a theme, is entirely, 100%, human. They are derived from morals. And morals are derived from various sources, religion being a major contributor.
 
US Conservative said:
Dude, thats NOT what he said, look at what he wrote. You need to account for the possibility that you aren't grasping the issue here.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to. And what he wrote was "it doesn't accurately describe the situation". I copied and pasted my definition from a noted dictionary, THE primary source for word definitions. The rest of what he wrote was all about HIS personal definition of government.




Perhaps you guys need to come to terms with the possibility that YOU'RE understanding of the word, and the rest of the worlds understand, differ?
 
Henrin said:
The right to shop where you want calls for other peoples freedom to be violated. Otherwise, people could refuse to commence in commerce with you for any reason what so ever and you're so called right goes out the window. You might not know this, but all positive right declarations call for a violation of someones liberty.
Click to expand...

There is no possibility to have absolute freedom, and if it comes between the protection of somewhat vulnerable sections of the population from discrimination of dominant groups then I choose the protection of vulnerable groups because the dominant sections of the population do not need that kind of protection.

And no, the rights of the shopkeeper are not being violated because there is no right to discriminate in the US constitution.
 
KevinKohler said:
How do they manifest universally? Where is this natural manifestation of ethics occurring?

Ethics, as a theme, is entirely, 100%, human. They are derived from morals. And morals are derived from various sources, religion being a major contributor.
Click to expand...

Animals have morals/ethics that allow their herds or packs to function well. An example is the way dogs signal when they are playing. More at https://www.google.com/search?q=eth...la:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb
 
Bergslagstroll said:
Through taxes but that restriction of having to pay taxes is much less then restriction then the restictions children have if they not get a good education. My country Sweden is one of the most left leaning western democracies with one of the worlds highest taxrates. Still people in sweden have the freedom to become rich and in some cases become billionaires. That for example the swedish entrepreneur that created Skype have earned billions of dollar. Maybee he would never have had that chance if sweden didn't have good free of charge school up and including free univerities? That my country Sweden and other welfare state have much greater social mobility than for example USA.

Also high taxes can also create alot of benefits to the entire society. For example heavily subsided good daycare centers make both parents have the freedom to make a career and also provide a safe and good enviroment for the children. Also for example universal healthcare leads to a more productive and healthy society. Also a unemployed person or a person with a unskilled work have much larger freedom to better his position and contribute to society if he/she can be healtthy and get medicial treatment if needed.
Click to expand...

Socialist sweden can't even sustain itself and must open its borders to immigrants who will fundamentally change it. Your country is what it is today because its protected by more powerful western nations. If you needed to defend yourself your nation would look much different.
 
KevinKohler said:
How do they manifest universally? Where is this natural manifestation of ethics occurring?

Ethics, as a theme, is entirely, 100%, human. They are derived from morals. And morals are derived from various sources, religion being a major contributor.
Click to expand...

Natural rights can be seen universally, even in animals-and my example was self defense. Ethics is a group phenomenon, morals are individual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom