The Purpose of Government is Freedom

[Citizen]

government tries to do just that. a problem. freedom is fundamental part, rather than the tip of the spear of the american ethos. some people have it ass-backwards and freedom is used as a means of avoiding responsibility, and increasingly so. it is undermining the necessity for a society to have discipline and understand the value in different freedoms, rather than the whole concept.

you protect freedom in the united states by using it for the benefit of yourself and the community: commerce, charity, etc. the government, much as it does, could loosely support these applications.

Very true. Freedom is not the infantile state of lack of responsibility and absolution from the consequences of one's actions.

IMHO, Thomas Jefferson said it best when he said, "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."

Basically, we can do anything we want just as long as we do not infringe upon the rights of others.

 

[ihopehefails]

government tries to do just that. a problem. freedom is fundamental part, rather than the tip of the spear of the american ethos. some people have it ass-backwards and freedom is used as a means of avoiding responsibility, and increasingly so. it is undermining the necessity for a society to have discipline and understand the value in different freedoms, rather than the whole concept.

you protect freedom in the united states by using it for the benefit of yourself and the community: commerce, charity, etc. the government, much as it does, could loosely support these applications.

Very true. Freedom is not the infantile state of lack of responsibility and absolution from the consequences of one's actions.

IMHO, Thomas Jefferson said it best when he said, "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."

Basically, we can do anything we want just as long as we do not infringe upon the rights of others.

I give you a thumbs up for being correct. I have not heard that in a long time.

 

[jillian]

Thats it. It doesn't exist for jobs, economy, health care, and etc. It just exist for the protection of the individual's freedom. All government policy should be weighed by what provides the most freedom for the individual.

and what would you say is the purpose of the commerce clause and general welfare clause?

and if we're talking about the most freedom for the individual, i take it you're pro gay marriage and pro Roe v Wade.

 

[jillian]

Very true. Freedom is not the infantile state of lack of responsibility and absolution from the consequences of one's actions.

IMHO, Thomas Jefferson said it best when he said, "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."

Basically, we can do anything we want just as long as we do not infringe upon the rights of others.

I give you a thumbs up for being correct. I have not heard that in a long time.

too bad it's a bunch of nonsense. and even jefferson didn't believe it or he wouldn't have owned slaves.

 

[boedicca]

Oh blah blah blah ^^^^

The bit about Jefferson owning slaves is a worn out canard. He never erected a temple of styrofoam to deify himself. Our founders weren't perfect - but at least they set forth a codified structure that eventually righted a serious wrong.

The commerce clause was to ensure free trade within the borders of the united states. General welfare essentially means to protect The Constitution and provide national defense - i.e., ensure a climate in which individuals are free to exercise their liberty.

 

[jillian]

Oh blah blah blah.

The commerce clause was to ensure free trade within the borders of the united states. General welfare essentially means to protect The Constitution and provide national defense - i.e., ensure a climate in which individuals are free to exercise their liberty.

you really believe that? blah blah yourself... i love pretend constitutionalists like you.

so you're pro choice, too?

 

[boedicca]

you really believe that? blah blah yourself... i love pretend constitutionalists like you.

so you're pro choice, too?

It's tempting to be amused by the intellectual dishonesty of equating abolition with abortion.

Your ignorance would be charming if it weren't so destructive.

 

[jillian]

you really believe that? blah blah yourself... i love pretend constitutionalists like you.

so you're pro choice, too?

It's tempting to be amused by the intellectual dishonesty of equating abolition with abortion.

Your ignorance would be charming if it weren't so destructive.

what's destructive is people who are as ignorant as you pretending they know anything about the constitution.

And you're the one saying the constitution is for INDIVIDUAL liberty. I figure that means you stay away from other people's moral choices.

 

[boedicca]

The only way to address you is to speak at a level you might be able to understand:

I am rubber
You are glue
Everything you say
Bounces off me
And sticks to you

You lack either the knowledge or the appreciation of our founding values - probably both.

 

[jillian]

The only way to address you is to speak at a level you might be able to understand:

I am rubber
You are glue
Everything you say
Bounces off me
And sticks to you

You lack either the knowledge or the appreciation of our founding values - probably both.

are you really that stupid?

you spout trash that not even the rightwingnuttiest of supreme court justices would say. you act like you have definitive answers when the greatest legal minds of the past 200 years don't agree.

but feel free to tell me all about your expertise.

loon.

and please feel free to let me know when you were admitted to practice before the USSC. I was in 1995. And while you're at it you can tell me how many petitions for certiorary you've had experience with... and how many districts you're admitted to. because if you really had that type of knowledge, you wouldn't spout off the way you do or be so certain in what you *think* the constitution says.

I look forward to hearing who your professors were. Because I'm pretty sure that Vinnie with the mop at the grocery store wasn't a very good teacher for you.

 

[antagon]

government tries to do just that. a problem. freedom is fundamental part, rather than the tip of the spear of the american ethos. some people have it ass-backwards and freedom is used as a means of avoiding responsibility, and increasingly so. it is undermining the necessity for a society to have discipline and understand the value in different freedoms, rather than the whole concept.

you protect freedom in the united states by using it for the benefit of yourself and the community: commerce, charity, etc. the government, much as it does, could loosely support these applications.

Very true. Freedom is not the infantile state of lack of responsibility and absolution from the consequences of one's actions.

i would say freedom certainly includes that state. i think government should make better use of the education system (for starters) to direct people to use their freedom responsibly and for the common good, valuing it by trying to create value with it. a focus on freedom alone has overridden this function in much public education

i reject the idea that freedom is the ultimate end of government because, exclusively, it is a neutral, rather than positive condition with mutual potential for despair and happiness.

we have an economy and a society which has emplaced rewards for weilding freedom, among other resources, to benefit society. i say the government should indeed uphold that framework, which includes some of the exclusions made by the OP.

 

[jillian]

Our rights don't come from the government. Government is not freedom. It is a necessary evil.

rights don't 'come from' the government, but they only exist to the extent they're enforced.

 

[boedicca]

Wrong. The right exists regardless of whether or not an individual is able to exercise it.

The fact that Africans were enslaves didn't mean they had no right to liberty. The infringement of another's right is the fault of the infringer, not the loss of a right upon the part of a victim.

 

[jillian]

all very nice as a philosophical construct...

when the reality doesn't match that philosophical construct, the rights, in effect, don't exist.

 

[boedicca]

If you believe your rights don't exist, then you have created a self-fulfilling prophecy for yourself.

But that is your personal problem.

 

[jillian]

Where were the rights of second generation americans who happened to be of japanese descent during WWII?

Care to tell them their rights existed?

 

[boedicca]

You are beyond dense.

Just because someone's rights are violated doesn't mean that the concept of the right ceases to exist.

 

[Citizen]

Thats it. It doesn't exist for jobs, economy, health care, and etc. It just exist for the protection of the individual's freedom. All government policy should be weighed by what provides the most freedom for the individual.

and what would you say is the purpose of the commerce clause and general welfare clause?

and if we're talking about the most freedom for the individual, i take it you're pro gay marriage and pro Roe v Wade.

Jillian, although I am clearly not allowed to practice before the Supreme Court, I am not entirely unfamiliar with our Constitution, and the commerce clause has become the most over misused clause in the constitution.

The commerce clause simply corrected a deficiency in the Articles of Confederation which allowed the individual states to levy whatever duties they saw fit on goods imported from foreign countries and also goods from other states by empowering Congress to regulate trade with foreign nations and among the individual states.

Section 8, Clause 1, was another correction on the deficiency of the Articles, because any government must have the taxing power, and that is what this clause established.

As to the meaning of Welfare of the United States, "With respect to the words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." - James Madison


"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State." - James Madison, considered the 'father of the Constitution'


IMHO, our Constitution established a very limited federal government with most of the governing powers left to the states. The Constitution only granted the federal government powers that could not be successfully utilized by the individual states, and all other governing powers were left to the individual states.

Although I was not the one ask, I will answer your question about gays and abortion. I believe that all of our citizens are empowered to do anything they wish as long as they do not infringe upon the rights of another.

Personally I do not believe that abortion should be used a means of birth control because there are many less drastic methods, including the morning after pill, but I will never have to face that decision.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Thats it. It doesn't exist for jobs, economy, health care, and etc. It just exist for the protection of the individual's freedom. All government policy should be weighed by what provides the most freedom for the individual.

Wrong, A Government exists to control the citizenry, depending on the type of Government determines the base level of that Control. A Government PROTECTS citizenry by restricting citizenry. Laws are a restriction on your ultimate freedom.

I'll agree with this. Government by definition is a restriction of freedom.

 

[bodecea]

Where were the rights of second generation americans who happened to be of japanese descent during WWII?

Care to tell them their rights existed?

Yes, their rights existed...they were just unjustly taken away.