That's right. I said it. I am a liberal. I am a liberal in the classical sense not the modern. I believe in liberty and that people have inherent rights, natural rights and that government exists because of those rights and for the sole purpose of protecting those rights not the converse. I, unlike modern liberals, believe economic liberty is a civil liberty. In fact, they are one in the same. There is no discernible or important difference between economic and civil liberty. What Is Classical*Liberalism? An important distinction between rights and needs is necessary before we continue. Modern liberals are not of this mind however. Modern liberals are of a collectivist mind. Where needs become valid claims. FDR in his 1944 State if the Union Address called for a "Second Bill of Rights" in an attempt to redefine the meaning of rights. This attempt included the following "new" rights: Sound familiar? Now the redefining of rights as FDR defines them differs from the classical view of rights in that: The above link goes on to describe the source of rights in classical terms but I will end here. The question this post poses to you "liberals" and "conservatives" alike. Are economic liberty and civil liberty one and the same with common defining characteristics of mentioned above or are economic liberties unrelated to civil liberties? If different, what characteristics of rights mentioned above do and do not apply to economic liberty?