11

Safety vs. Freedom (Natural Rights)

Posted by dbhalling 8 years, 2 months ago to Philosophy
57 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Those who would trade a freedom for a little security
will get neither, and
deserve neither
(Benjamin Franklin – sort of)

The purpose of government is to protect your Natural Rights, not to keep you safe. Reversing these is reversing cause and effect. If safety is your priority then the government should build big prisons and put everyone in them where they can protect them.

The safety (security) first goal is why we have no new vaccines, why we banned DDT and killed over 100 million people, why we don’t have nuclear power – resulting in the deaths of 10s of thousands of people. This is precautionary principle of Anthropomorphic Global Warming with the same disastrous results.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 3.
  • 14
    Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 8 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I would prefer the airlines provided their own security. The airlines owning their planes have that right and people can choose what airlines they wish. I read a great line on the internet a few days ago - We don't lock our doors at night because we hate everyone outside, but because we love everyone inside.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by edweaver 8 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It sounds like you are talking about property rights which as Dale stated, is a natural right. The government can never keep one safe. It's impossible with all the money in the world. Government can only secure the right to protect and defend one's own property. I don't believe anyone has the right to do as you state, without your permission.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Proper protection of your property rights is part of your natural rights. Being screened to fly in an Airplane by the government is not. Obviously if you own the airplane, you can demand people be screened.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 8 years, 2 months ago
    Hello dbhalling,
    If the focus is on protecting our natural rights then safety and security will naturally follow. They need not be the principle. That said: The Constitution makes clear that "National defense is the priority job of the national government". http://www.heritage.org/research/repo...

    Of course, National defense is not the same as providing individual security and one might rightly argue that in many circumstances the government has gone overboard and thus created the problems you cite. Sheople clamor for protection and security provided by our government. Snowflakes need enforced safe zones... when they should grow up, put on their grown up pants and take responsibility for themselves.
    Regards,
    O.A.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 8 years, 2 months ago
    So, if I put up a fence with a lockable gate, place signs on my yard saying keep out, put a locking my door on my home and keep it closed and locked more than open, I am a prisoner? And those wishing to come on my property to use my garden faucet for water and enter my home because they are hungry or use my toilet because they have need to do so, or lay their heads on my bed because they are cold and tired from traveling, have every right to do so because they are passing through to elsewhere and my property is in the way?

    I get natural rights (individuals enter society with certain rights that no government has the right to deny). I also get that we live in a world with boundaries, political and personal. Ignoring those pesky unnatural boundaries is a great way to get yourself hurt or worse.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by richrobinson 8 years, 2 months ago
    I


    I have long been in favor of eliminating the FDA, EPA and most of the other illegal government agencies that exist. It is a difficult argument to win. Nancy Pelosi was asked about Trumps pick for SCOTUS. She reflexively went to fear mongering. She said that he would dirty the air and water, take away womens rights, make children less safe...and on and on. Fear and insecurity are effective weapons for Progressives and when you throw in the press as an accomplice it's hard to convince people that freedom and liberty are superior to any alternative.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by edweaver 8 years, 2 months ago
    I believe you are totally correct on this DB. It's my belief, our large government is a direct result of the mistaken practice of making people safe, instead of protecting our natural rights. If they simply stuck to protecting our natural rights our government would be significantly smaller and we would all get to keep more of our property.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo