Skip to comments.The Loss of Freedoms List (Vanity Post)
Posted on 01/25/2005 4:37:42 PM PST by Cornpone
click here to read article
Here's another to replace the double:
Turning the First Amendment into "Freedom from Religion" instead of Freedom of Religion." What a difference a pronoun makes.
It is suggested that kids are becoming smarter than their parents. ;0
Well, I can't argue that.
Serfs were farmers who were so subjugated by tyrants that they became virtual slaves on their own property. The more right someone else has to order you what to do, the more you become a serf. A businessman who is not free to manufacture the products he wants, the way he and his customers want it, the more he is restricted in who he can hire and fire and the more he is restrained from using his land the way he wants, the more that businessman is a serf.
Repealing alcohol Prohibition is leading to serfdom?!
You can tell a lot about a person by what the freedoms he values. I would trade my right to a beer for the right to manufacture vaccines. That right vanished with the federal vaccine act in 1994. Today doctors and drug manufacturers have become subservient to politicians, lawyers and courts who wield life and death authority over their trade.
Legalizing gold ownership in the 1970's is leading us back to serfdom?
More important is the right to develop mineral resources. That right has been slowly strangled over the years by extreme environmentalists in the EPA to the point where most new US resources come from other countries.
Abolishing sugar and gasoline rationing is leading us back to serfdom?
Rationing was a temporary measure during WWII. Today US taxpayers are forced to support sugar prices. Gasoline prices are high and sometimes shortages occur because of the myriad environmental regulations of gasoline that forces the serf-producers to formulate different varieties of gasoline.
Banishing Jim Crow laws is leading back to serfdom?
What good did it do them? Blacks are taken for granted by democrats who have used welfare to purchase their very right to get married and have a stable family. Today about 40% of young black men are under control of the criminal justice system. Inner cities are ruled by crooked politicians who have driven good people to the suburbs leaving the neighborhoods ridden with crime and poverty.
Repealing wage and price controls is leading us back to serfdom?
Wage controls are coming through a different door. Lawsuits are forcing employers to hire and promote unqualified people because of their race, sex or sexual preference.
Eliminating the 55 mile per hour national speed limit is leading us back to serfdom?
I would gladly trade the freedom to drive fast for the freedom to kill the cougar who menaces my children, or to shoot the bear that broke into my house, or drain the swamp on my land that breeds mosquitoes Today, you can pay a heavy fine for that privilege.
Sunsetting the Assault Weapons Ban is leading us back to serfdom?!
Not much good to have an assault weapon if you can't carry it. We used to be able to own fully automatic machine guns. We used to be able to carry weapons on commercial aircraft.
Killing the federal ban against commercial airline pilots packing heat is leading us back to serfdom?!
Read the fine print and you will realize that few pilots are going to jump through the all the hoops to take advantage of this. They have to travel to a remote area in the Southwest to take a rigorous training course. It used to be passengers could have guns in carry-on bags.
Legalizing the ability of citizens to use the Internet for profit is leading us back to serfdom?!
Didn't make much difference. It was never illegal for private computer networks to use internet protocol for their own networks. They would have just bypassed government networks.
Giving women the right to vote is leading us back to serfdom?!
But today politicians want to make it easy for illegal aliens and phantom voters to steal our elections. After they do that we will become serfs. The doctors at hospitals and clinics that were forced out of business along the Mexican border became serfs of politicians subservient to illegals. American serf-taxpayers are paying dearly for this new suffrage of illegals not just in dollars but also in crime.
It's no wonder that you 3rd Party types have no national popularity...you have no comprehension of reality.
The reality is that for every step that government takes back, it advances three steps forward. They give more freedom to homosexuals and prevent the rest of us from shunning them. They give rights to workers and take away the right of business to hire qualified people.
They tax everyone and give the money back to us provided we give up our rights -- purchasing our freedom.
They give tax dollars to politicians running for office but restrict out right to speak against them.
Why not? That's what it says, "Congress", not the states.
Businessmen aren't serfs. They do business where they choose to; even the communist Chinese can't stop that.
... And yet, vaccines are still being made. Go figure (perhaps hyperbole is not your friend, after all).
That said, anyone who thinks that I am not more free now at the age of 33 than my grandparents were at the same age is beyond delusional.
Real men don't whine.
Nonsense. On my land alone we mine the rock for your roads, sell water to local businesses, harvest timber for your homes, as well as have ample coal and iron for our industries. We've just drilled our latest oil well, too.
More broadly, the Bush Administration has just opened up vast new stretches of Alaskan property for mining and drilling...and existing federal law already permits you to force the government to sell federal land to you for less than $100 per acre where-ever you can establish profitable mining operations.
The EPA (and lawsuits) and such are problems, no doubt, but hardly on the scope that you claim.
"What good did it do them?"
Freedom for anyone helps free all of us in some little way, just as surely as slavery for anyone enslaves all of us at some level.
That you criticize such freedom belies your real motivation for threads such as this one, too...
Yes, rationing is now gone...and we are MORE free today because of that fact.
Lawsuit (tort) reform is being handled this very year by Republicans in Congress. Medical liability is first up on that list.
There's our problem right there. People think the "common good" is a Constitutional test.
How do you feel about the Patriot act?
We can freely carry assault rifles. I do. We can still own machine guns. I do. We can still carry weapons on our own aircraft. I do. And commercial pilots can once again pack heat, too (yet another baby step in the right direction).
According to testimony at a House committee, the decline of domestic resource development is getting serious:
"During the 1990's while the rest of the US economy was booming, there was a serious decline in U.S. mining activity, a decline that continues today with some of the trends and impacts illustrated below:
"Since 1996, there has been a 73% decline in new claims.
Exploration expenditures have continued to steadily decrease and grassroots exploration has virtually disappeared in the U.S. More money is consistently being spent on overseas projects.
Mid-size producers and juniors, generally where most exploration investment dollars come from, have chosen to invest overseas rather than in comparatively equal opportunities in the US."
George Bush doesn't control the courts and the lawyers. He barely controls the low level beauracrats in his own administration. What will happen after we get another Democrat in the white house? When Hillary takes over?
"Didn't make much difference."
Yeah, that whole "Internet Revolution" thing will never catch on... < /sarcasm >
Trading stocks on-line, selling books on-line, international auctions on-line, gambling on-line, porn on-line, doing your taxes on-line, news on-line, message forums on-line, corporate catalogs on-line, selling programming services on-line, on-line ads, email, et al...
Didn't do us much good?! Oh brother... What, like you've never even performed your own Google search??
Maybe it depends on what freedoms you hold dear. Certainly there is more freedom to engage in debauchery. Sodomy is not only legal now, but public schools are touting it to kids as an alternative lifestyle. But every single day we are losing the freedom to avoid these people.
Illegal aliens haven't stolen many elections recently; overall voter fraud is down substantially (yet more steps in the right direction). The Daley Machine may still influence Chicago, but it isn't swaying national elections any longer.
No, the real problem here is that *your* mind is enslaved. You see only serfdom in a a land of extraordinary freedom.
Until you free your mind from such artificial negativism, you'll remain self-enslaved no matter what progress we make in further expanding our freedoms.
Government advocacy of socially deviant lifestyles
To which Kleon asked:
How does this interfere with your freedoms?
It interferes because
(1) government shouldn't promote any "lifestyle",
(2) government will push degenerate behavior onto our children, and I want them OUT of that forum, and
(3) a society that can't value the family will lose the strength the family unit bestows on the society of which it is a necessary part.
Damn, man! What's your malfunction? What I hold dear?
Look it, my grandfathers were saddled with gun laws that forbade black people from owning any firearm. Where they could go was restricted. Their manner of speech was controlled. You take a 50 year old black man who had to address a 10 year old white kid as "sir" or "ma'am" while they can turn right around and call this man "boy."
I could go on and on, but it would be lost on you.
Real men don't whine.
Where have *you* lost your freedom to walk away?
Ever. Much less "every single day?"
"Nearly 40 years ago, there were about 26 makers of all types of vaccines. [See the figure.] The number fell to 17 by 1980. Now, the number of vaccine makers supplying the United States has dropped to only four. There is only a single manufacturer of the vaccines for eight diseases. There are only two major makers of flu vaccines. When there are so few producers of each vaccine, problems at a single plant can create shortages.
In recent years, the United States has come to depend on overseas vaccine plants to provide an increasing share of the supply. One company, the Chiron Corporation, prepared 46 million doses almost half of the anticipated supply for the United States at its plant in Liverpool, England. However, this years production run was rejected for import by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) because of contamination problems."
But we have plenty of people making beer!
Indeed. He's donned such mental blinders that he sees no expansions of freedom (Voting Rights Act, anyone?!), only perceived losses of liberty (apparently we "serfs" are forbidden from taking explosives and firearms onto public transport, Oh My!).
...And yet, contrary to your earlier hyperbole-drenched rant, vaccines are still being made.
Quite honestly I don't understand it well enough to comment. However, when the government arrested Ted Kaczynski they listed among the bomb making materials found in his shack, sodium chloride or what they identified as NaCl, common table talt. That doesn't make me feel too comfortable.
How about the freedom to refuse to associate with them in business? The Boy Scouts were told they had hire homosexual scoutmasters. A lady in Chicago was fined by the city for advertising for a Christian live-in handyman. Churches are told they cannot reject employees who are homosexual.
Many people here have stuck up for the Patriot Act.
Personally I am not keen on it at all but as I am not currently living in the States I am powerless to do much about it.
All I say to people that support it is:
Would you support it if Bill Clinton was responsible for it?
One of my favorites with regard to lost freedoms that I haven't seen posted in this thread is "window-dressing" security.
As a comical aside to terrorism posted in another thread, the cinemas in my area have the 16-year-old ushers requesting to peer in customer bags for "security" purposes as they enter the movie. I simply say, "No thank you!" and brush past the acne-prone beanpoles. Like I'm going to allow a child to tell me I can't carry my legal and very utilitarian Benchmade Mini-AFCK around?
Now, that's a silly plan that is NOT based on law and I simply won't comply. It's yet another outrageous private-sector rule designed to help people "feel" safer when no additional safety exists. It also makes for harried planning when you must determine where your pocketknife (or sidearm, cellular phone, flashlight, etc.) is acceptable, and where it's not. The pathetic part of the story is that you would not believe the number of full-grown adults who queue-up for this degrading treatment!
The REAL challenge is when legislation is enacted to make these kind of inspections legal and common in our country. Where will it all end?
~ Blue Jays ~
Contrary to your hyperbolistic nonsense, you can do business with whomever you please. If you want to refuse to accept a job offer from a gay man, you are free to do so for that very reason. Corporations and organizations, however, may be under some different restrictions, but those are *not* applicable to the freedoms of individual humans.
Not really true. When you give more freedom to people who don't respect the law and the freedom of others, we are all less free. Today the Democrats want to give voting rights to felons.
Putting a tyrant or a criminal in jail gives freedom to the rest of us. Women feel free to walk at night if they aren't worried about rapists. Iraqis have more liberty with Saddam in jail.
But before 1941, we didn't have rationing so we had more freedom before. Look, we are talking about long-term trends. Rationing was just an historical blip.
Good. Let's hope they grow some stones and don't cave in this time.
Like I said I really don't understand it well enough to comment on it specifically. Its 132 pages of difficult reading. However, I'm generally against government attempts to gain more authority to intrude into people's lives. At the same time, the government and our laws haven't caught up with the 'electronic era.' For example, as someone who has seen criminals commonly carrying around a bag full of cell phones so they can compartmentalize and disguise their criminal acts, it makes sense to me to authorize a wire tap against the individual and not a specific phone. I've also seen a lot of cases where restriction on computer records matching have enabled an awful lot of fraud at taxpayer expense. An example of that is you're not supposed to be able to get a government small business loan if you are in default on a government student loan but in the past, because they couldn't match records, it happened all the time...and we just got fleeced again. I don't know if the Patriot Act has changed that or not.
I have avgue memories of Clinton trying to pass a similar act to the Patriot and it getting flamed down by the Republicans.
Could be wrong though.
If you have a Federal Firearms License. It used to easy to get one. I understand it is very difficult today.
The big innovation was the invention of the web browser.
In 1920, it was illegal for men to buy beer.
The 18th was an infringement of numerous unemumerated individual rights, nullified by juries until repealed.
In the 1930's, gold was illegal to own ($100 limit).
Yet another unconstitutional prohibition on our right to own property of any type.
In the 1940's, our military was racially segregated and the government mandated at gunpoint how many ounces of sugar you could have in your pantry.
Jim Crow in the military, and out, was unconstituional.
Sugar was rationed under war powers.
In the 1950's, Blacks were being beaten by policemen, hosed by firemen, bitten by sheriffs' dogs, as well as prevented from even *registering* to vote by Jim Crow laws.
None of these practices could even remotely be considered Constitutional.
In the 1960's, it was *legal* to pay women less than men for the same job.
It still is, if there is a difference in job performance.
In the 1970's, it was illegal to drive more than 55 miles per hour.
Another unconstitutional 'law'.
In the 1980's, it was illegal to use the Internet for profit.
In the 1990's, it was illegal in most states to carry a concealed handgun. Up until 2004, it was illegal to have a folding stock, flash hider, and 30 round clip in your assault rifle.
You seem to think that anything Fed/State or local authorities declare to be the 'law' is Constitutional. -- Why is that?
Today, none of those restrictions on our freedom apply.
They never did 'apply', with the exception of rationing during wartime.
And how do you know that? When an election is stolen, is it officially tallied as "stolen"? How do you measure election fraud?
Instead, look at what is happening. In southwestern states, officials tell cops that they cannot even inquire about the immigration status of a suspect. Cops are forbidden to call the INS. In California, the lieutenant governor had been a member of a group that wants to eject all non-hispanics from the state. Don't tell me they aren't affecting our politicians.
In Washington DC, the mayor was a convicted crack addict who, when he got out, later won election to the city council. Don't tell me that city isn't corrupt.
You see only serfdom in a a land of extraordinary freedom.
The trouble is, the people who are getting more freedom are criminals, wasters, greedy lawyers, politicians and perverts. The people who have less freedom are the ones who produce goods and the ones who create jobs, the people who provide medical care.
Things aren't much better. Even when the KKK was lynching blacks, they only hung a few hundred of them total. Today that's the typical summer crime carnage in Washington DC. And of course today in a lot of big cities most people are not allowed to carry weapons, only the criminals carry weapons and people are not nearly as free to walk at night as they were in 1950.
You take a 50 year old black man who had to address a 10 year old white kid as "sir" or "ma'am" while they can turn right around and call this man "boy."
And today in New York City, the white residents have learned never to make eye contact with black men in the subway. But are the blacks better off now?
"Congress shall make no law" meant what it said, but did not mean that only Congress was so restricted.
Why not? That's what it says, "Congress", not the states.
Art VI, and the rest of my comment explains "why not". -- Did you bother to try to understand them?
The 10th made clear that States were also prohibited powers, among them the power to infringe on peoples RKBA's.
After the civil war, southern States were denying freed slaves the RKBA's, under the pretense that the BOR's did not apply. The 14th was ratified to end that controversy.
Oh, geez. The definite article 'the' to modify blacks. Not 'blacks', not 'black people', not 'black Americans'. No. It's "the" blacks.
Real men don't whine.
But public transport is where we are most likely to need them. Ask any inner city dweller who has been mugged.
Southhack appears to be applauding the one step forward while ignoring the two steps back.
Not in America.
In other words, a businessman doesn't have human rights? Used to be they were allowed to reject employees or clients for any reason. Now they can't. We've lost that freedom.
Excuse me. I meant to say, "the Negroes".
Oh, I'm more than convinced you did. Yes, sirree!
Real men don't whine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.