Do you agree with this definition of liberty?  Do you really think our country today has this kind of liberty? Should it?

Keep in mind that if a country were to adhere to this definition, all drugs would be legal. For adults,  there would be no restrictions on guns, alcohol, or cigarettes. Gays would be accepted under the law. Religions would be accepted too. There would be no compulsory education. And people would be free.

-------
Like men we'll face the murderous, cowardly pack,
Pressed to the wall, dying, but fighting back.

---

my only problem with that would be teaching young children religion. but other than that it would be nice.

---

Why shouldn't children be taught religion?

Would you think it was acceptable if religious people thought your children shouldn't be brought up with no religion?

-------
Like men we'll face the murderous, cowardly pack,
Pressed to the wall, dying, but fighting back.

---

"And when I say liberty I do not simply mean what is referred to as "free enterprise." I mean liberty of the individual to think his own thoughts and live his own life as he desires to think and to live; the liberty of the family to decide how they wish to live, what they want to eat for breakfast and for dinner, and how they wish to spend their time; liberty of a man to develop his ideas and get other people to teach those ideas, if he can convince them that they have some value to the world; liberty of every local community to decide how its children shall be educated, how its local services shall be run, and who its local leaders shall be; liberty of a man to choose his own occupation; and liberty of a man to run his own business as he thinks it ought to be run, as long as he does not interfere with the right of other people to do the same thing."

 

Do you agree with this definition of liberty? Do you really think our country today has this kind of liberty? Should it?

Keep in mind that if a country were to adhere to this definition, all drugs would be legal. For adults, there would be no restrictions on guns, alcohol, or cigarettes. Gays would be accepted under the law. Religions would be accepted too. There would be no compulsory education. And people would be free.

 

---

I think as America is right now it would outperform such a society as that in terms of power, wealth, progression etc.

It sounds great, but who knows how it would turn out. We could speculate, but for all we know a totally utterly free society could be an incredibly dangerous one.

-------
Graham: Fame is the first disgrace.
News stand boy: Why?
Graham: Because God knows who you are.

---

Quote: from Death of rats at 6:38 pm on May 11, 2008

---

"And when I say liberty I do not simply mean what is referred to as "free enterprise." I mean liberty of the individual to think his own thoughts and live his own life as he desires to think and to live; the liberty of the family to decide how they wish to live, what they want to eat for breakfast and for dinner, and how they wish to spend their time; liberty of a man to develop his ideas and get other people to teach those ideas, if he can convince them that they have some value to the world; liberty of every local community to decide how its children shall be educated, how its local services shall be run, and who its local leaders shall be; liberty of a man to choose his own occupation; and liberty of a man to run his own business as he thinks it ought to be run, as long as he does not interfere with the right of other people to do the same thing."

 

Do you agree with this definition of liberty? Do you really think our country today has this kind of liberty? Should it?

Keep in mind that if a country were to adhere to this definition, all drugs would be legal. For adults, there would be no restrictions on guns, alcohol, or cigarettes. Gays would be accepted under the law. Religions would be accepted too. There would be no compulsory education. And people would be free.

 

---

 

I think as America is right now it would outperform such a society as that in terms of power, wealth, progression etc.  

It sounds great, but who knows how it would turn out. We could speculate, but for all we know a totally utterly free society could be an incredibly dangerous one.

---

So you disagree with the founder of America's views on liberty?

Is the purpose of a country really based on how much it can preform, or on how happy, prosperous, and free its people are?

Post edited at 6:45 pm on May 11, 2008 by Death of rats

-------
Like men we'll face the murderous, cowardly pack,
Pressed to the wall, dying, but fighting back.

I just think more freedom generally=less structure.

-------
Graham: Fame is the first disgrace.
News stand boy: Why?
Graham: Because God knows who you are.

---

Quote: from Acid World at 9:42 pm on May 11, 2008

---

Quote: from Death of rats at 6:38 pm on May 11, 2008

---

"And when I say liberty I do not simply mean what is referred to as "free enterprise." I mean liberty of the individual to think his own thoughts and live his own life as he desires to think and to live; the liberty of the family to decide how they wish to live, what they want to eat for breakfast and for dinner, and how they wish to spend their time; liberty of a man to develop his ideas and get other people to teach those ideas, if he can convince them that they have some value to the world; liberty of every local community to decide how its children shall be educated, how its local services shall be run, and who its local leaders shall be; liberty of a man to choose his own occupation; and liberty of a man to run his own business as he thinks it ought to be run, as long as he does not interfere with the right of other people to do the same thing."  

   

Do you agree with this definition of liberty? Do you really think our country today has this kind of liberty? Should it?  

Keep in mind that if a country were to adhere to this definition, all drugs would be legal. For adults, there would be no restrictions on guns, alcohol, or cigarettes. Gays would be accepted under the law. Religions would be accepted too. There would be no compulsory education. And people would be free.  

   

---

   

I think as America is right now it would outperform such a society as that in terms of power, wealth, progression etc.    

It sounds great, but who knows how it would turn out. We could speculate, but for all we know a totally utterly free society could be an incredibly dangerous one.

---

 

So you disagree with the founder of America's views on liberty?  

Is the purpose of a country really based on how much it can preform, or on how happy, prosperous, and free its people are?

---

The founding fathers built America to be a giant compromise. Nobody is supposed to be able to walk in and say they want something one way and it becomes that way. Somebody is supposed to argue their point against somebody elses point till both parties are so infuriated with eachother that they end up at a compromise where neither really gets what they want completely.

Atleast, that was the opinion of some book I read in Barnes and Nobles.

EDIT: and the relevance of this is that such a system makes America basically a middle of the road country. For every libertarian there is a staunch liberal.

Post edited at 6:50 pm on May 11, 2008 by Acid World

-------
Graham: Fame is the first disgrace.
News stand boy: Why?
Graham: Because God knows who you are.

Also, in their time, there were no liberals as we know them today, almost every single one of them could have been described as libertarian.

-------
Like men we'll face the murderous, cowardly pack,
Pressed to the wall, dying, but fighting back.

---

i disagree with people teaching children religion because they learn from a young age that that is the truth, and it's basically imprinted in their minds, when religions really have no basis. i'm all for teaching like intellectually mature tweens if thats what they want to learn about, but normally children can't make that distinction between physical truth and unprovable truth.

---

Who are you to tell parents that they cannot teach what they believe is the truth to their children?

Everyone has a different set of 'truths' they believe, and I'm sure we'd all love it if everyone agreed with our beliefs, but forcing people to teach something against their beliefs will only end up hurting you in the end.

I'm sure you have certain things which you firmly believe are true. So do people with religions. Why are your truths more right than theirs?

-------
Like men we'll face the murderous, cowardly pack,
Pressed to the wall, dying, but fighting back.

---

Quote: from iinsurgent at 9:56 pm on May 11, 2008

---

i disagree with people teaching children religion because they learn from a young age that that is the truth, and it's basically imprinted in their minds, when religions really have no basis. i'm all for teaching like intellectually mature tweens if thats what they want to learn about, but normally children can't make that distinction between physical truth and unprovable truth.

---

 
Who are you to tell parents that they cannot teach what they believe is the truth to their children?

Everyone has a different set of 'truths' they believe, and I'm sure we'd all love it if everyone agreed with our beliefs, but forcing people to teach something against their beliefs will only end up hurting you in the end.

I'm sure you have certain things which you firmly believe are true. So do people with religions. Why are your truths more right than theirs?

---

no one. i've never told anyone they can't teach their children what they believe is true. that was just my opinion.
i consider science true because w/ science, things can be and have been physically proven. most religions, if not all, base their doctrines on the belief of a so far unseen, unproved god. i don't claim to know whether or not there is a supreme being, or any being, which created all that we know. but it makes more sense to base our facts off of things we can prove exist.

---

no one. i've never told anyone they can't teach their children what they believe is true. that was just my opinion.  
i consider science true because w/ science, things can be and have been physically proven. most religions, if not all, base their doctrines on the belief of a so far unseen, unproved god. i don't claim to know whether or not there is a supreme being, or any being, which created all that we know. but it makes more sense to base our facts off of things we can prove exist.

---

But your opinion is that parent's shouldn't be allowed to have their children be taught religion.

A religion the parents believe to be true.

-------
Like men we'll face the murderous, cowardly pack,
Pressed to the wall, dying, but fighting back.