Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Equality or Liberty?


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,456 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 27 August 2013 - 06:42 PM

As I do on occasion.  I listen to conservative radio, and the thing that jumped out today, was not Syria and Obama talking out the side of his mouth.

 

It was a statement about Conservatives are more for Liberty (not all), and Liberals are for Equality.  

 

How can we bring the two of these together, or are they so far apart to even think about using them in the same sentance?

 

 

Googled Equality versus Liberty?

http://heinonline.or...iv=11&id=&page=

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



#2 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,760 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:31 PM

Easy. Equal protection for everyone under the law, which is what was establshed (mostly, sans some social tabboos) int eh constitution. Otherwise, there is no such thing as equality. Individuals aren't equal in regard to their merits. The problem with LOLberal equality chants, is that they generally want to force people to believe a certain way by legislation, and then call it equality, Some of the civil rights act is testament to this reality.

 

Liberty is for each indiviudal. The right to private property and personal choice without infringing on someone else liberty.



#3 hippieskichick

hippieskichick
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,832 posts
  • LocationAlbany NY

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:35 PM

Simple. Shitcan the two dinosaur parties and bring in some Libertarians to reorganize the show.



#4 Tim the Beek

Tim the Beek
  • VibeTribe
  • 16,348 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:38 PM

Liberty is for each indiviudal. The right to private property and personal choice without infringing on someone else liberty.


Yepper.

Though I get a little twitchy when business becomes a governing force...



#5 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,456 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:40 PM

Easy.

 

Equal protection for everyone under the law, which is what was establshed (mostly, sans some social tabboos) int eh constitution. Otherwise, there is no such thing as equality. Individuals aren't equal in regard to their merits. The problem with LOLberal equality chants, is that they generally want to force people to believe a certain way by legislation, and then call it equality, Some of the civil rights act is testament to this reality.

 

Liberty is for each indiviudal. The right to private property and personal choice without infringing on someone else liberty.

 

 

Can't we all be equal without infringing on someone else's liberty?  



#6 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,760 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:48 PM

Can't we all be equal without infringing on someone else's liberty?  

 

Only if by equal, you mean equal protection under the law. Individuals are not equal in any other regard. The merits of my character aren't equal to yours. You're probably a lot better at certain things than I am and vice versa. There is no way to make individuals equal in any other sense.



#7 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,456 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:54 PM

Only if by equal, you mean equal protection under the law. Individuals are not equal in any other regard. The merits of my character aren't equal to yours. You're probably a lot better at certain things than I am and vice versa. There is no way to make individuals equal in any other sense.

 

I think I am, but probably am not.  

 

Is the problem, some want to give people equal rights to all under the law, while others feel that doing this will infringe on their liberty?



#8 hoagie

hoagie
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,454 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:54 PM

Only if by equal, you mean equal protection under the law. Individuals are not equal in any other regard. The merits of my character aren't equal to yours. You're probably a lot better at certain things than I am and vice versa. There is no way to make individuals equal in any other sense.

 

we are all pink on the inside



#9 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,760 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 08:18 PM

I think I am, but probably am not.  
 
Is the problem, some want to give people equal rights to all under the law, while others feel that doing this will infringe on their liberty?

No, i think it comes down to special interest groups looking to get favoritism from the law instead of equal protections. For instance, why do we have protected groups? Hate crimes? Etc....

Thhings of this nature do not amount to liberty for alla nd equal protection under the law. They amount to special considerations for "protected" groups. For instance, forcing segregation laws upon the populous isn't liberty. Its actually an infringment on liberty. Or forcing businesses to service protected froups. Same thing.

generally, these types of policies reduce individual liberty to promote protected groups. it's almost like a form of reparation. Same thing can be said of affirmative action.

#10 hoagie

hoagie
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,454 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 08:21 PM

special inerest groups = kiss asses.



#11 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,456 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 28 August 2013 - 01:50 PM

No, i think it comes down to special interest groups looking to get favoritism from the law instead of equal protections. For instance, why do we have protected groups? Hate crimes? Etc....

Thhings of this nature do not amount to liberty for alla nd equal protection under the law. They amount to special considerations for "protected" groups. For instance, forcing segregation laws upon the populous isn't liberty. Its actually an infringment on liberty. Or forcing businesses to service protected froups. Same thing.

generally, these types of policies reduce individual liberty to promote protected groups. it's almost like a form of reparation. Same thing can be said of affirmative action.

 

 

I understand hate crimes, and may be MADD, etc...  But those are actual crimes, and commiting a crime, strips people of their liberty.

 

I guess I am at a loss at how giving gay people rights to be married.  How does this strip liberties from anyone else?

 

As they are the only group and cisrcumstance in America not seen under the law of the land as equal. 



#12 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,760 posts

Posted 28 August 2013 - 02:05 PM

I guess I am at a loss at how giving gay people rights to be married.  How does this strip liberties from anyone else?

 

It doesn't. This issue is used for grand standing and political divisiveness. Nothing more. One reason why the state should not have anything to do with marriage except in any disputes that may occur from contract.



#13 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,456 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 28 August 2013 - 02:11 PM

It doesn't. This issue is used for grand standing and political divisiveness. Nothing more. One reason why the state should not have anything to do with marriage except in any disputes that may occur from contract.

 

 

 

But if all people should be treated equally under the law of the land, then isn't the government stripping away gay peoples liberties?



#14 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,760 posts

Posted 28 August 2013 - 02:13 PM

Yes. but that's what governments do. Just like theyve stripped away your right to unreasonable search, habeas corpus and a host of other inalienable rights. Governments are a disease on civilized societies. No different than cartels, gangs or mobs.



#15 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,456 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 28 August 2013 - 02:18 PM

Yes. but that's what governments do. Just like theyve stripped away your right to unreasonable search, habeas corpus and a host of other inalienable rights. Governments are a disease on civilized societies. No different than cartels, gangs or mobs.

 

OK, that makes sense, but I dont know if I would go that far, it is MAN that is the disease of government, since he or she can be bought and sold.

 

Gvoernment is just the machine that MAN takes advangate of at everyone's cost.



#16 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,760 posts

Posted 28 August 2013 - 02:48 PM

Government is the creation of man. it's the chicken or the egg thing.

 

If man makes rules that man can't follow, it's a failure of man, sure. But when it goes so far as to show that NO MAN is capable of not molesting the rules, then it is the institution itself that is a failure. Man shouldn't be gifted with the authority over others if man has been tested and found wanting. Which is the case with governments.



#17 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,456 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 28 August 2013 - 03:07 PM

Government is the creation of man. it's the chicken or the egg thing.

 

If man makes rules that man can't follow, it's a failure of man, sure. But when it goes so far as to show that NO MAN is capable of not molesting the rules, then it is the institution itself that is a failure. Man shouldn't be gifted with the authority over others if man has been tested and found wanting. Which is the case with governments.

 

I get your point.

 

BUT IMO, it is not ALL man in government, yes, it is most men or woman who molest the rules.

 

Would you consider Ron Paul to have molested the rules?  I cannot think of many others, but I am sure there is a minority that do not molest the rules.

 

 

 

I just thought the comments of Liberals and Conservatives can be boiled down to Equality or Liberty was so simple, I needed more back ground.

 

That Liberals want everyone to be equal, even if it strips liberties.

 

And Conservatives, want liberties protected.



#18 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,760 posts

Posted 28 August 2013 - 03:14 PM

Consercatives dont want liberties protected. They want a different set of liberties infringed upon. In the name of the lord or some other bullshit. The only thing that separates these two groups is just that. In which way they want to molest liberty and the rule of law and to whom favors will be provided.

 

As for Ron Paul, I'd say he was a good choice for a credible, upstanding guy to be in the executive seat. But its rather irrelevant isn't it? One congressman that everyone hates while high praise is passed on tot h e most despicable characters we can muster up?

 

Ya, the countries got some deep rooted fuckin' mental problems.