Is freedom a right or a responcibility?

[kvnchrist]

If freedom is a right then shouldn't be given to everyone and if so then what precautions should free people place on themselves to guarantee that their freedom doesn't infringe on the freedoms of others? If there are precautions that free people need to observe to ensure that all people are free then should it be called a freedom or a responsibility?

[HeyYou]

Freedom is something your government gives you. Or not..... you only have a 'right' to what the government says you do. If the government decides that 'freedom' isn't useful any longer, than you won't have it. What you will have instead (probably) is civil war.

[Ghogiel]

I think a right is itself a responsibility, of sorts.

 

A right, cannot, beyond the realm of the conceptual, exist without 2 people agreeing upon them. And for their continued existence to be granted, those people have to continue to uphold them. Which is a responsibility.

 

Freedom is an idea. freedom is never without boundaries, in any sense. So perhaps freedom is just a feeling, and the best you can hope for is an equality.

[colourwheel]

Freedom can be both a right and/or a responcibility or neither. Really depends on if you are looking at things from a social aspect or personal aspect. The topic is too loosely asked to really make judgement on specifically defining it as either or...

 

example: I have the freedom to breath air by inhaling and exhaling. This does not really make it a responcibility or a right but asked in different ways it can also be both a personal responcibility and/or a right.

Edited February 9, 2013 by colourwheel

[Lisnpuppy]

I believe all people have the right to be born free....and the responsibility to stay that way.

[kvnchrist]

 

 

example: I have the freedom to breath air by inhaling and exhaling. This does not really make it a responsibility or a right but asked in different ways it can also be both a personal responsibility and/or a right.

 

 

Yes you have a freedom to breath, but if you breath in more than air, lets say Cigarette smoke would you have the freedom to exhale in a room of people or would you have the responsibility to exhale outside in order to ensure the freedom of others not to breath in second hand smoke. this is only one example of what I mean as far a being responsible with the freedoms you have.

[kvnchrist]

I believe all people have the right to be born free....and the responsibility to stay that way.

 

Only if the social norm allow you to do so. The truest form of freedom is an open mind, but superstitions, prejudices and the ever present element of the unknown often deminish it's power. Even if their effects are temporary they might just cost you an opportunity that will never return.

[JimboUK]

It's both, rights come with responsibilities, it's an individuals responsibility to exercise those rights without denying someone else theirs.

 

I believe all people have the right to be born free....and the responsibility to stay that way.

 

This^^^^ Government doesn't grant rights, it takes them away, in most cases with the consent of society, increasingly these days without.

[Lisnpuppy]

The issue with being free is that no one can be 100% free to do whatever they wish. YOUR right to be free will eventually infringe another's right to be free.

 

When government interceeds in personal freedoms should be (at its best) to preserve the balance of freedoms between all people. Which freedoms you may ask? I would say...at least to me since I am from the US....in support of those things set out in the preamble of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. (I am not going to argue now about gun control or some of those more interpretable articles...the Constitution was created to be a "living document" which means that it is interpreted by those whom it safeguards at the time and will thus be flexible and changeable.)

 

The Preamble of the Constitution states:

 

We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

This sets out the duties of the government and the Bill of Rights sets out the freedoms protected BY the government and FROM the government.

 

It is a uneasy balance.

 

I remember however that this is a government of the people, for the people and by the people. WE are the ones that are responsible for the government (make no excuses that one person can not help make change...I would point you to Rosa Parks who by the simple fact of refusing to move to the back of the bus inspired millions to help incite change.). Just as the three parts of government have checks and balances, the PEOPLE are the checks and balances on the government vice versa. If we want change it is in our hands to make it so. Argue all you want about the power of government and money and etc. I will argue, look at our Founding Fathers. Who would have given them a snowballs chance in hell to be able to obtain what they did. More of an underdog there could not have been in a time that even speaking against the King could get you in lots of trouble.

 

So when I say that those have the right to be born free and then have the responsibility (It doesn't have a "c" in it where I come from :thumbsup:) to remain free means that one has the duty to make sure that the government KEEPS this uneasy balance and stays in check while still maintaining the principles put forth in the Preamble to the Constitution. Our continued dialogue is between those that think the government should stay completely out of individual liberties and those that believe individual liberties can not stand without the government providing some basic rights to those disenfranchised.

 

As to those that are not born free.....I think those of us that are should endeavor to help THEM make a stand...not indiscriminately decide to free them. Freedom and liberty is defined by those people that seek it and one person's version can not be imposed on another. So yes, help them stand but do not pull them into something kicking and screaming.

 

Part of what has made (in my opinion) the United States concept of government so great was the ability to maintain a balance and compromise. Without the willingness to give and take no Nation can remain intact much less free. Today also is the very unhappy balance between safety and freedom and on this we must remain most vigilant. I believe we can be perfectly safe at the expense of all our freedoms. Each person must decide and then bring forth their ideas of how much that balance must shift from one to another. The issue with democratic type rule is that compromise must be made to get anything done and thus a majority rule comes into play.