Friday, December 15, 2006

The Definition of Freedom

The Definition of Freedom

  1. The condition of being free of restraints.
  2. Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.


    1. Political independence.
    2. Exemption from the arbitrary exercise of authority in the performance of a specific action; civil liberty:

      freedom of assembly.



  3. Exemption from an unpleasant or onerous condition:

    freedom from want.

  4. The capacity to exercise choice; free will:

    We have the freedom to do as we please all afternoon.
6. A right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference



The above is the definition for freedom in the American Heritage Online Dictionary.



Read it again. People have died for the above reasons, and people are dying right now - death that our modern society, with all its comforts and technology, has no hope of defeating.



The condition of being free from restraints.



The liberty of a person from slavery and oppression.



And perhaps most important of all, the last two - so intertwined they are really one:



The capacity to exercise choice; freewill - a right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference.



The writers' of our Declaration and Constitution put it just as well - rights endowed by our creator (notice they did not name the creator), endowed upon us as a natural right of being human - life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.



They are just words - but they are words that have improved our world, even as our leaders, throughout history, have made the wrong decisions. They are an idea - an idea that people are dying over.



In a way, it makes no difference that the war in Iraq is really about oil. The soldiers there are dying for the principles upon which we were founded as a nation, and for their compatriots in the field. It is easy enough to say that our military forces are being misused (I myself was in favor of settling Saddam's hash, without ever believing he had stockpiles of the now infamous weapons) - it is much harder to study our history in the region, and how our use of oil has affected that history - it is harder yet to draw the inevitable conclusions about our actions as a nation.



You see, the text does not say:




We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Americans are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among
these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.



Rather, it reads like this:




We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among
these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.



Notice that - that all men - not just Americans, but all men. Yet, by our actions with oil producing nations we have sacrificed those ideals by which we are supposed to order our life for the simple expediency of a cheap fuel source. Is that any better than slavery? I have no answer for that, or the answer I do have does not make me happy.



And this other idea - the pursuit of happiness - what starry eyed liberals penned such nonsense? That could include almost anything.



According to the above definitions, in fact, it does. Acts which have a result upon others should be regulated or illegalized. Everyone can agree that bank robbery or driving a car drunk are not acts which fall under the definition of freedom; and yet, owning a gun or drinking alcohol are.



That is where personal responsibility comes in. If by my actions I harm other people, or their property, those other people have a right to deny me those actions. If I am incorrigible, and continue to rob banks or drive drunk, the people can throw me in jail - and they will be right to do it.



That is our justice system in a nutshell.



For those other things, they should be regulated - the setting of hours of sale, age requirements, the verification that a person buying a gun is not a criminal - none of those things interfere with our freedoms - they assure them.



Some things should NEVER be regulated; speech (even that has it's limits - you can't yell fire in a crowded theater); sex (which also has it's limits - you can't have sex with an underage person, even if they are willing - or any person who is not willing); religion (see the above two examples).



Every person you ask will have a different answer; in the past, our leaders have contradicted these ideals with seeming impunity. At the time the words were written, black people were still slaves.



We have made progress, but there is yet much progress to be made. I watch the faces of the soldiers who die for these ideals, and I wonder if we can at last begin thinking about what the words really mean; words which have invoked sacrifice and effort in every generation.



We will need our best for the coming times, and we are not being well served by our leaders. As responsible adults and parents, it is time to do what small things we can.













powered by performancing firefox

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Definitons of Conservatism

I often wonder exactly what people mean when they say conservative; there are some things that are easy - fiscal responsibility; the ability for an individual to live his or her own life in a manner of their own choosing, with as little interference from the government as possible; the freedoms as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution; the desire to keep taxes at a minimum, and to make sure that our country is secure in the world in which we live; the idea that things should be better as generations pass, not worse.

These are things which are easy to agree upon, but along the way in this country they have come to be interpreted quite strangely. The party which is supposed to be the conservative party, for instance, has done in my opinion a disservice to their moral guidepost.

They pay lip service to the above ideals, but the actions of our leaders speak louder than the words for those who are willing to listen. It is easy, in this hectic world, not to listen, and to think that our leaders are people of honor and courage who tell us the truth and who are really looking out for us. They may get slightly off course from time to time, we think, but overall they are doing the best they can.

But that is no longer the case; our system has been hijacked by callousness and big money, and we see our leader's moral system for what it is in the economic numbers which cause President Bush to say our economy is good; it is good, for oil men and wall street brokers - it is good for a certain sector of society, but there are millions and millions, the vast majority by far who do not belong to that sector, and who are getting pinched harder and harder every day. I know, because I am one of them.

The number of people getting pinched is far greater than the number doing well, but the counterbalance is all on the side of the people doing well - they are doing good enough to even out the numbers, and they are repaying the nation by gradually taking away the securities of the less well off, by slowly adhering to the demands of the bottom dollar and the low expectations built into corporate policy and government law.

If you change the rules to where something which takes advantage of people is legal, is it any more moral?

Or is it less so?

I say that to change the rules to suit your own ends is worse than just breaking the law and ripping people off. It is a betrayal on a whole new scale, and yet that is exactly what has been happening behind the closed doors of our government and corporate leaders.

Well, it is time to swing that door open. Educating yourself is the only way to do that; do not ask what you can do and moan that one person cannot make a difference - educate yourself, and action will come naturally as a result of that education, even if that action is doing nothing more than talking to those you know, and helping to educate them.

That may be enough, all by itself.