Freedom For You

I want this blog to be a modern Magna Carta, from the 1215 event which gave some rights to individuals.

Sunday, August 13, 2006

Freedom vs Protection

When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing you may know that your society is doomed. Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged.

My friend Denis said, "There are all kinds of unwanted casualties of war, Bilbo, and one is always some civil rights."

Which is why leaders love war Denis. The constitution is ignored as they consolidate power.

Denis- "You sacrifice to protect, and later you hope to regain those rights."

I do hope for the freedoms the constitution promises Denis, but, I suspect I will be long dead before we get free from the powers of our own government. For two hundred years Americans have said they would not mind giving up a little freedom for a little protection. Giving up a little freedom here and there has added up to millions of pages of laws, rules, and regulations on the federal register. So where is our protection? To give up a little freedom for safety is a one way contract. You give up your freedoms but you have no way to force the government to deliver protection. When they fail to follow tips and protect us, as in 9/11, they just collect their government pensions (guaranteed better than ours), with a cost of living raise, and retire to Florida, or become a Washington lobbyists.

Denis asked, "What the are the options?" (to giving up some freedoms).

Denis, my list of options are too long for this post so I will just start out with the idea that a search warrant should be required to listen on private phone conversations of American citizens. (The 'alleged' London plot was not detected by illegal wire tapping. It was old fashion tips and infiltration.) The best option is to require the government employees to follow the constitution, and stay out of other countries. The constitution will not enforce itself. Men and women who love liberty are required to enforce the constitution.

The argument that one should comply and cooperate with authority if one has nothing to hide is the argument kings and Caliphs have always made. The new Communist party started out that way. After the revolution in Russia in 1917 most of the population was happy and cooperative. Soon millions were killed simply because they dissented. Dissent soon becomes illegal in an authoritarian society. The communist party finally consisted of only 6% of the population telling the other 94% what to do. Everything became illegal. People who act like cattle end up in the slaughter house. I prefer to be a deer who will jump over the fence and roam free, even if I have to fight off predators.

Denis said, "It is wishful thinking to believe complete freedom can be available to terrorists and we remain safe."

That's Orwellian obfuscating. I'm not in favor of giving a terrorist complete freedom. Far from it. I think they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But let us make sure we are making a distinction between an alleged terrorist and one that is convicted of a terrorist act. During the recent thwarted "alleged" London terror plot I have not heard one government employee or media reporter refer to the suspects as "alleged terrorist". The fear mongers have already convicted and sentenced the alleged perpetrators, much like a black man in the south in 1930 would be hung as soon as a white woman said he did something bad to her.

I think Islam is the worst of the religions and I would be in favor of a constitutional amendment that would prohibit any religion that was not tolerant of another religion, or would not let its members convert to another religion, or leave said religion.

Our meddling creates enemies. The terrorists of future generations have not been conceived, but the propaganda to motivate them has been and is being created each day by our foreign policy. Our unborn children will be targets of unborn terrorist.

When I am forced to chose sides in Israel's religious war, or any other dispute, the other side hates me. For my whole adult life, 50 years, I have been forced to support Israel. I had no say in the partition of Palestine nor did my elected representatives. It was decided by a bunch of United Nations bureaucrats. The Jews should have their own country for security, so I vote to give them part of New Jersey, or give them some of our federal land. Yellowstone Park is almost as big as Israel. If people want to voluntarily support Israel, as millions do, go ahead, but their support should not be forced on others.

Bilbo Baggins

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cheap shot: "Which is why leaders love war Denis. The constitution is ignored as they consolidate power."

Politicians get voted out of office because of wars, historically. To assume they love war, ignores history- at least, in America.

We have had quite a few wars in our short history, but I can't think of any freedoms we lost because of them. Actually, we have more, and the Courts and people are generally inclined to err on the side of more freedom than less, in almost every case.

"The argument that one should comply and cooperate with authority if one has nothing to hide is the argument kings and Caliphs have always made", and is one I did not make, and I agree it is faulty.

You are arguing against something besides what I said, I think. I believe you have a healthy distrust of government that we all should posess, but your motivation is based on something other than protecting our freedom, and I'm not sure what it is, or if you know either.

I won't ask if we should wait for the next airplane to blow up in our cities before we spy on those who we suspect, and look for evidence. I think you'll agree that doesn't work anywhere in the world, so there has to be a compromise that protects citizens and their rights, as much as possible.

Israel is a different story and doesn't belong in this particular debate.

Regards,

Denis

11:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Charles, Love your answer and the reasoning behind it. Could not agree with you more. Bill Mullen

11:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wrong.

You can begin with the Civil War actually. State sovereignty basically became non-existant. In a book, "A View of the Consitution" by William Rawle, he makes the point that all people have the right to determine what type of government they will submit themselves to. Abraham Lincoln in a Senate speech basically said that the Southern States had no right to determine their own government.

There's one big HUGE right taken from us.

I agree with Bilbo. Those who love power love wars. Besides, history is often white-washed by the victor--even in America. Learn the difference between Heuristic and Erristic history.

5:53 PM  

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

<< Home