2007-08-11 10:25:42 · 15 answers · asked by marcin p 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Nope
2007-08-11 10:30:32 · answer #1 · answered by Brian 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not possible..
While certain sacrifices may be made temporarily, and voluntarily -- that's sacrificing liberty for security.
Liberty cannot exist without freedom, and vice versa.
Sacrificing liberty always results in a loss of freedom.
And freedom can be lost without people noticing it -- if they've never tried to push beyond the bounds of their comfort zone.
How many people would really notice if they were only allowed to leave their home county once per month -- maybe 10% actually do on a regular basis.... that's a huge restriction, that 90+% would never even notice.
2007-08-11 17:42:11 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Does this false dichotomy never go away?? This question has been asked at least 3 times over the summer.
Without freedom there is no such thing as liberty.
Sacrificing liberty will NEVER (Jamais) increase freedom. However, sacrificing Freedom for Security is and has always been a bad idea.
Why? because Security is an illusion, a state of mind; while freedom is a guarantee against intrusion into private life by government.
2007-08-11 17:55:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is freedom without liberty to pursue it?
I should be "free" to have private conversations, for example, but I am allowed to be spied on by our Federal Government.
I should be "free" to civilly protest and congregate wherever I see fit, for example, but I am restricted to "free-speech zones" during a presidential rally.
I should be "free" to buy a weapon or board an airplane, for example, but if my name should be the same as one of those suspected terrorists on the "No-Fly List", MY rights will be suspended.
These are not outrageous kinds of liberties I speak of, but liberties that should be inherent to every American citizen.
2007-08-11 17:35:26 · answer #4 · answered by Sangria 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Those that would sacrifice liberty for security, deserve neither. Ben Franklin was right then, as he is now. Too many have fought and died to throw these rights away.
2007-08-11 17:40:13 · answer #5 · answered by mikosin357 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Would we have freedom without liberty?
2007-08-11 17:30:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Never should Americans be forced to give up their unalienable rights for security/freedom. A lack of free speech, free press, and free religion breeds political instability.
2007-08-11 17:37:05 · answer #7 · answered by Adam Mac 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I still like how old Ben Franklin said it, "any many who would give up a liberty for a security , deserves neither ",countless men have died for those principles, are you weak enought to give them away?
2007-08-11 17:34:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Don't you mean liberty for security? It's a balance. Liberty will do you no good if you're dead. If we had 100% liberty we'd have anarchy, and that doesn't last very long.
2007-08-11 17:29:09 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Your askin a whole bunch of people who sit on their computer and answer questions so I think liberty and freedom are words that have no meaning.
2007-08-11 17:32:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋