16 January 2015
What is freedom? Isn't that the real question we should be asking ourselves at this time in our nation's history? I have my idea of what freedom is and it has been shaped by my parents, other respected adults, experience and education. What I consider freedom isn't what most people or those in government seem to think it is.
My concept of freedom is one in which I can worship as I wish, express myself as I wish, work in a vocation of my choice, spend what I earn as I wish, raise my children as I wish, choose with whom I associate, and have my own political beliefs. These are just some of the things which are part of my concept of freedom and areas in which government should stay out.
I believe government, which is a representation of its citizens, has a legitimate interest to maintain a civil society; I am not an anarchist. It should also stay out of areas which are truly conscience based decisions such as matters of faith, love between adults, or the raising of children (as long as there isn't physical abuse, with a clear definition of what physical abuse entails).
We an agree on certain things. Murder is wrong, theft is wrong, assault is wrong, corruption is wrong, a nation needs to protect its borders and citizens, discrimination based on ethnicity is wrong, discrimination based on sexuality (except for faith based private organizations) is wrong. This is just a start.
We can also agree an individual should be secure in their person, life is precious, a person's property should be secure, a person should be able to travel freely as long as they are not breaking any law. If I am driving as I should, no equipment malfunctions, not any open warrants, have insurance then I shouldn't be stopped for any reason. There is no probable cause.
I believe we can agree government should provide defense of the nation, a police force, a fire department, representation with other nations, a means to pass or change law, a judicial system, and representation on trade with other nations.
At what level of government these should be led is what seems to be up for debate. Where in the governmental hierarchy is it best addressed? These are the questions, every so often, we ask ourselves. We are in the midst of one of those times now.
We continue to have these discussions because we refuse to learn the lessons of history as we think we are more enlightened than those who have gone before us. We are still human beings with the same faults, vices, and imperfections as our ancestors. This is each generation's arrogance; we will do it better. Yet, we never do.
All our advancements in technology always lead to ways of better oppressing those whom the government is suppose to protect and allow to flourish. It allows for greater government control and surveillance of its citizens as opposed to greater freedom.
Doubt the repetition? Read for yourself The Federalist Papers and The Anti-Federalist Papers which was just such a debate between the founders of our nation, the United States of America. It was a debate carried out via essays in the important newspapers of their day; in the public eye much different from today.
The didn't view the Constitution as a living document. They wanted to limit governmental intrusions into their lives because they had experienced that intrusion during the occupation of the British before the revolution and didn't want it to happen again. They looked at the span of history up to their time, and the ways in which the different forms of government had either helped or hindered their citizen's lives, and wanted to create a constitution which held the government in check and allowed the citizens freedom to succeed to the extent their talents allowed.
Just a few thoughts to get started.
