The word "freedom" can often be misinterpreted. There are many here and abroad who don't understand that freedom comes with some difficult responsibilities. The most obvious is the most overlooked, personal responsibility for your wellbeing. If you want to be free, you have to take care of yourself and your family BY yourself. If you do not or cannot, you cannot be free.
Sometimes, in pursuit of freedom, we find we have to give away some to keep the rest. If you work for someone else to provide for yourself and family, you have to surrender a portion of your freedom and subject yourself to your employer's requirements. If you find the requirements to be tolerable, you pay for your job with some of your freedom. This quid pro quo is usually acceptable.
If, for a legitimate reason, someone cannot become self sufficient, there are government, private and religious assistance programs. The last two are relatively obligation free but the first, though subtle. develops a kind of loyalty to the provider, the government, a dependency, a desire to preserve the status quo. A vote.
When government asks you to surrender some of your freedoms and cites "national security" or some other high sounding purpose, beware!! Since 9/11, we have allowed government to spy on us, our Congress, Supreme Court Justices and anyone else they choose to without a warrant. Since many of us are not without sin, this enables government officials in the loop to obtain information about us which we would not like to see published. Think General Petraeus and other Generals, Congressional and Supreme Court member's votes, DOJ (COMEY) and anyone else you can imagine.
Even though sometimes it seems to make sense to surrender our privacy rights, it should not be done with the assumption that only honest people will have access. However, to minimize the chances that some may risk a penalty if caught, it should be mandatory death penalty. Our rights are more precious than any individual. In a country which rewards, instead of punishing, a deserter whose actions were directly responsible for other service members deaths, we cannot be too certain that others of his ilk will not escape punishment.
Sometimes, in pursuit of freedom, we find we have to give away some to keep the rest. If you work for someone else to provide for yourself and family, you have to surrender a portion of your freedom and subject yourself to your employer's requirements. If you find the requirements to be tolerable, you pay for your job with some of your freedom. This quid pro quo is usually acceptable.
If, for a legitimate reason, someone cannot become self sufficient, there are government, private and religious assistance programs. The last two are relatively obligation free but the first, though subtle. develops a kind of loyalty to the provider, the government, a dependency, a desire to preserve the status quo. A vote.
When government asks you to surrender some of your freedoms and cites "national security" or some other high sounding purpose, beware!! Since 9/11, we have allowed government to spy on us, our Congress, Supreme Court Justices and anyone else they choose to without a warrant. Since many of us are not without sin, this enables government officials in the loop to obtain information about us which we would not like to see published. Think General Petraeus and other Generals, Congressional and Supreme Court member's votes, DOJ (COMEY) and anyone else you can imagine.
Even though sometimes it seems to make sense to surrender our privacy rights, it should not be done with the assumption that only honest people will have access. However, to minimize the chances that some may risk a penalty if caught, it should be mandatory death penalty. Our rights are more precious than any individual. In a country which rewards, instead of punishing, a deserter whose actions were directly responsible for other service members deaths, we cannot be too certain that others of his ilk will not escape punishment.
No comments:
Post a Comment