re: Why does true freedom and liberty scare people?

quote:

---

Why does true freedom and liberty scare people?

---

Because propaganda is a mother fricker

Government enticements absolutely do dissuade people from going 60 through my neighborhood. It's why a pay a fee in the form of property taxes to fund that effort. The police identify the speeders through speed radar and their license plate. Someone is caught going at an unsafe speed in a neighborhood in violation of municipal posted speeds, the police is there, the offender is issued a ticket and forced to pay a fine, or worse.

It does not prevent companies from dumping toxic waste that would poison the groundwater, but if found out, government and the courts can issue prohibitive fines for doing so that teaches the offender a lesson.

We farm out certain tasks to a more central authority whose purpose is to protect and serve society from those that would exploit society in excess if given the chance.

We give the government that power. We grant government the monopoly on force within limits. We use government to curtail the freedoms of those that take advantage of society in a deleterious way that affects your quality of life and your liberty.

OP sounds like he has an ax to grind with some black people and few Muslims.

Freedom and Liberty have two primary results that make it a target for some.

1. Personal Responsibility. This is a problem because the natural human condition is to, whenever possible, NOT be responsible for anything negative in our lives. So, it's easy to tell people that their failures are somehow someone ELSE'S fault and therefore, a little bit of government is necessary to help your sorry failed arse.

But, #2 is even worse

2. Freedom means the other guy gets to be free too!

quote:

---

I don’t understand why you’re saying no the the first 2 points. Who is creating laws about driving and food regulations if it’s not our government?

---

People have such weird ideas of what law does. Laws don’t prevent anything.

quote:

---

Laws that no one believe to be reflective of societal values don’t accomplish much (if anything).

---

The law does not change the heart, no. Any compliance with the law would be external only. However, external conformity does have its value.

I look at this in terms of the 3 uses of the moral law of God that John Calvin elucidated on in his Institutes of the Christian Religion. In that book, Calvin noted that the 1st use of the law is to act as a mirror, to show us our sin and need for Christ. The 3rd use of the law is as a guide for Christians to know how we are to live in light of our salvation.

The 2nd use of the law is intended to be a restraint against sin in society, particularly in the civil sphere (government). This use acknowledges that the law does not change hearts, but it does restrain sin when enforced.

We know this instinctively because all our lives we have had rules to follow with positive and negative consequences for obeying or breaking those rules. Properly enforced laws do change behavior, at least generally, even if they do not change the heart. In this way, laws typically do accomplish behavioral changes which are good for society, depending on the standard used for what is "good", and depending on the enforcement of those laws.

Conservative philosophy means you win or lose on your own.

Most people have been conditioned to be victims and cant accept responsibility for their own lot in life, which they have chosen themselves

Most of the population would rather have safety nets and the nanny state than they would having to admit responsibility for their own choices and corresponding outcomes.

The government doesnt exist for you to thrive, it exists to keep opportunity open and we have ample opportunity in this country.

You don't live in the US, so I'm not sure why you thought you needed to opine. You're a socialist.

Asswipe, I've lived in the US since 1974. Come from a family of cops on my Dad's side. Mom was from NZ . Hope that clears it up with your snippy comment

quote:

---

I'd like the Constitution to be enforced as it is written, not interpreted by some judges. There are no "buts", asterisks, or any other exceptions written in the Constitution. It says what it says. There should be zero limits on speech.

---

well the right of judicial review was established in 1803 in marbury v. madison so you're a little late to the party on that issue.
as for these activist judges trump can simply ignore them, the have no enforcement mechanism that doesn't run the executive and i think that's how this ends if trump holds the house through the midterms. what "speech' are you wanting to engage in but the "government" is stopping you?

quote:

---

Did you see the recent story about that judge in Wisconsin who tried to go herself and arrest a defendant that was in the hospital? Are you ok with the government making laws to protect themselves?

---

don't live in wisconsin so don't care, believe it or not chief you live in a city, county, in a state and 90% of the government you can see touch and feel happens to you on one of those three levels.

quote:

---

I don't appreciate the government being involved in extortion. Which is exactly what a property tax is.

---

yeah well you need to take that one up with your county. every county i've lived in had property taxes. we moved back to little rock for a lot of reasons but chief among was DFW's sky high property taxes. mine are $3,500 a year and i think that's fair. 75% of all infrastructure is built at the state, county or municipal level. if you want bridges and roads the federal government doesn't really do that. i can tell every state we've lived in (illinois and texas) that had low or no income tax had sky high property taxes

quote:

---

I shouldn't have to have a permit to go fishing in public waters or to cut down a tree on my own property.

---

don't fish, so don't care. my yard guys trimmed my trees today and i'm pretty sure they didn't need any permits.