Question of the Day

[ayoub]

What is a fair cost, in terms of giving up your rights, for safety and "freedom"?

Comments

[kosta-pasta.livejournal.com]

didn't quite catch the Q.
anyway, the cost of a freedom and safety is equal to the inner work has been made.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Would you give up rights like free speech, freedom of movement, or any other basic human rights just to feel safe?

[kosta-pasta.livejournal.com]

i doubt it

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Good answer...

[inspectorjury.livejournal.com]

Those who would trade freedom or safety deserve neither.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Very well said :)

[avis-noctis.livejournal.com]

Nothing. If I must trade my rights for so-called "freedom" or "safety" then in reality, I have neither.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

:D

[avis-noctis.livejournal.com]

Good question, by the way.

I am loving these Questions of the Day.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Glad you're enjoying them :) I kinda like 'em too :)

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Excellent answer!

[mighty-rontor.livejournal.com]

I think every citizen of age should carry a gun. It works in Texas. Cuts down on the asshole factor like thermite through butter. That's a no-brainer for me.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

It also means more assholes with guns...

[mighty-rontor.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but they're more likely to think twice before acting like assholes.

V comes out today here in the US.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

I got it yesterday... Awesome...

[miriyasterling.livejournal.com]

Yesssss!!!!! I forgot about that!!!! Thanks for the reminder.

[miriyasterling.livejournal.com]

There's no such thing as a trade for either they are an illusion. No where in the world when you interact with other humans you are never "safe." Also no matter what you are never truely free, society has standards for you to follow to belong.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Do you feel that society's standards are too strict?

[miriyasterling.livejournal.com]

I think that we only have the illusion of being free. From birth we are raised in our "tribes" persay and to a certain extent there are always going to be barriers and rules that we must follow.

However being an American and unhappy with the current attempts and agruements about limiting personal freedoms and choices (aka: gay marriage arguement, etc) I'm not sure I'd be one to talk. I'm a bit cynical about Freedom when my country is making war in another country to bring them "democracy and freedom" while in their own country they are taking away a woman's right to choose and homosexual's rights to marry their lovers.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Well, until recently, we didn't have human rights legislation in the UK, that came from Europe...

[crescent-fresh.livejournal.com]

i won't do it. c'mon man, you know i'm a liberal.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Word!

[hypovex.livejournal.com]

"If you're not ready to die for it, put the word 'freedom' out of your vocabulary." - Malcom X

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

A fantastic quote...

[kalquessa.livejournal.com]

That rather depends on the person deciding between the two, doesn't it? It's old freedom from/freedom to question.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

In that case, let me rephrase, is the loss of the right to free speech fair if you then have the freedom to walk where the government will allow you to?

[kalquessa.livejournal.com]

Dude, I love you, but if you're going to ask about specific current events, ask about them specifically, for the love of pete. That way, uninformed buggers like myself can tell when it's okay to jump in with an out-the-ass answer and when to keep the hell away for fear that they might be called upon to render a serious comment upon something. :P

Again, I would have to ask: How badly do we want to go wherever it is that the government is going to let us go if we give up our free speech? If we want to go there more than we want to retain our free speech...then the answer looks pretty obvious. Likewise if this is not the case.

Whether it's reasonable of the guv'mint to demand this price for walking into someplace or another is a completely different question, and one I am so unprepared to answer that it's pathetic, insert further protestations of general ignorance here.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

I was just giving you a theoretical example :)

:D

[red-bull.livejournal.com]

by default the question conflicts with uk safety legislation and therefore cannot be quantified in the eyes of the law.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Ah, but all I'm seeking is an opinion :)

[red-bull.livejournal.com]

ahhhh an opinion.... here goes... having personal experience, they are beyond price.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Well said, my friend :)

[atomb0mb.livejournal.com]

The "safety" you can get by sacrificing freedom is anything but safe.

Beware of anyone who tells you they're going to need to restrict your freedom in order to protect you... they're getting ready to screw you hard. There isn't one time in history where this wasn't the case.

Never give up freedom to someone in exchange for so-called security from them.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

An impassioned answer!

[donnickcottage.livejournal.com]

Life isn't fair. And to me there's no real answer to that question. I guess it's somewhere between rolling over and asking Osama to bring death quickly, and being chained to a dungeon wall blindfolded for life. I'll know my intrusion limit when I see it and I haven't yet.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Bragi, sometimes I'm really glad you're around...

It's always good to get an opinion that doesn't agree with my own, and you've voiced it well :)

[childeofloki.livejournal.com]

I am not sure I understand what you are asking.
I mean, what is the worth of freedom if you have given up rights to aquire it?

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Precisely!

[childeofloki.livejournal.com]

Than all I can say is that you can never conquer a truly free man. The most you can do is kill him.

[ornjkitty.livejournal.com]

I remember being on the bus on the way to work one day, not long after I'd gotten out of college, and some lady was bitching about the fact that her little Johnny Joe Bob couldn't dress up in his little Batman costume for school anymore at Halloween. She went on bitching and moaning about how America was a free country, etc., etc. and this was an infringement on her rights, by golly!

The truth is, and it's a scary thought, that we are only as "free" as our governments allow us to be. No matter what freedoms the laws may grant us, it is the governments that enforce them (or dance merry heck all over them when they so choose). We have all heard the line about "absolute power corrupting absolutely" ... and governments have not been too shy about taking advantage of a lot of nasty goings-on to get people to agree gladly to their tightening the noose on us little folks even further. How, in a supposedly free country, did eminent domain laws ever get passed? Oh yes, those are just for emergencies, and they'll never use them ... until they do. When it comes down to the bottom line, the only person who can decide what rights you do or do not have is you. And it is up to you to enforce that, because no one else (especially not a government, which is, after all, looking out for its OWN best interests!) will do it for you.

That being said, given the current absence of any kind of working moral code, I suppose we have to have laws, ... sort of, ... but laws are not nearly as effective at making everyone play nice as the practice of basic etiquette would be. There's not as much money in etiquette as there is in law, however, so I guess common courtesy will never make a come-back.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Common courtesy was never really that common anyway...