How do Americans Define Freedom?

Remember "unalienable rights"?


This Opening Post is intended to demonstrate how perception could interpret American Society as possibly being debunked as myth. And offer a simplistic critique of the entire American Judiciary system.

I realize people grow and change as life deals them things to deal with.
And that friends and family should leave room for friends and family to grow and experience new things.

However, i don't believe friends and family tell friends and family that there are so many rules. laws, and regulations to our friendship that in reality it is IMPOSSIBLE to live long enough to learn all the laws, rules, and regulations.

So, as a jury member, or as an American, if you are not a friend and you are not family then can a jury member or American legally claim to be a peer without being family or friend?

How can any American claim to be a Law Abiding citizen when they don't know all the existing laws?

It's like sitting a bunch of 2 year olds down to play monopoly without the rule book and punishing them with a time out when they break the rules, somewhat.

Americans,

If we took all the Supreme Court Justices, all the Senators, and all the Representatives and locked them in one building with all the luxeries and with all the pen and paper they need, and not let them out until they wrote down verbadim all current existing laws, do you think they would be able to finish the task within their lifetimes?

Then how logical is it to expect any child born from today onwards to comply with the rules of the game if they won't live long enough to learn the rules of the game?


FREEDOM does not Equal rules and laws so numerous you don't live long enough to learn them.

And what portion of TAX PAYERS money is spent paying Law Makers to make even more laws????

Why pay them more money to make more laws when they don't or can't enforce existing laws of which no body seems to know all of them anyways?


Our elected leaders talk to the public like their idiots because they believe the public is a majority of idiots.

that's my opinion, right or wrong, i think we could be doing better.

i'm concerned for the future, and the mayhem we are leaving to them to clean up after.

Freedom is a buzzword tossed around too much these days.

The majority of people in developed countries if they cut away all the BS attached would soon come to realise that freedom they're so proud of is nothing more than having just enough money to buy things you want. And while ever that is the case, you're freedoms will continue to disappear.

The political system is designed to facilitate capitalistic growth, and maintain law and order so as to not interfere with this process.

Law evolves as crime evolves. I just don't like the jargon they use to obfuscate the reality of it all.

Sorry if its off topic.

Originally posted by ghostsoldier

Law evolves as crime evolves. I just don't like the jargon they use to obfuscate the reality of it all.

Sorry if its off topic.

I don't thinkk it's too far off topic at all.

I agree with how you feel, especially by the jargon.

remember friend,

Who makes the rules?
Rulers make the rules.

in my own defense for my own participation with my society,

i think i'm the worst leader i know.
i think i'm the worst follower i know.

somewhere inbetween i hope to find the compatible citizen within me.
i just don't know how the information owners are using the information.

but, based upon my intentionality as a basis, i'd like to have some hope 0that those calling the shots know where they are steering the ship (earth

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
somewhere inbetween i hope to find the compatible citizen within me.
i just don't know how the information owners are using the information.

but, based upon my intentionality as a basis, i'd like to have some hope 0that those calling the shots know where they are steering the ship (earth

That's my hope as well. And at the moment its not all that promising.

They bleed us for as much money as possible before they make a change they knew they should of made decades ago.

In a first-world capitalistic society, I think the only way to change the system is to change whats "cool" - being a compatible citizen is just about not breaking serious laws and paying for things with money.

Culture-Jamming is the activism of the 21st century.

Freedom is an illusion. Nothing is free. Well rather i should say free of what? Everything is subject to something or someone. We all have rules to live by so we are not truly free. I could say i am free. free to do whatever i want and the truth is i really am free to do whatever i want. I have to pay a price for it, however i am free. I am not free however from the effects of gravity. I can not reach critical mass and escape the earths pull. I have to obey laws of physics that i didnt create and will never fully understand in my lifetime. I do not think its fair that if there is a creator that he made such laws without giving me the rule book lol. Seriously though my take on freedom is that everyone and everything is free but with exceptions. Some are more fre than others in regards to whatever topic you wish to discuss, be it politics or nature or physics or religion. Doesnt matter. Freedom has limits. Its in knowing these limits and knowing what your basic freedoms should be. I should be free to speak and i should be free to live according to what i feel is fair while not impeeding my neighbor or fellow mans right to do the same. Its laws that help to keep things staright between what one person feels is his right to do while protecting the rights of others. Its not perfect and sometimes people do suffer for it but i personally know of no other way to govern man. Do you?

funny. i just authored a thread using the same phrase.

"certain unalienable rights."


to me, this means that no one gave them to me. and i own nothing to anyone whom seems to think that they have done me a "service" by fighting for them in my behalf.


fighting for freedom is not going to make it any more mine than it already is. it is not something that can be fought for. it is mine by birth.


silly humans.

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher

How can any American claim to be a Law Abiding citizen when they don't know all the existing laws?

Legislation is not law, merely evidence of law. Gravity did not come into play just because Isaac Newton wrote the equation describing gravity on paper, gravity existed, and people didn't need Newton to come along and tell them that. What Newton did was come up with a mathematical equation that helped to explain certain properties of gravity, and this is the best any legislature can hope to do as well, to accurately describe the properties of law, so people can understand them better.

Just like gravity, that force we can't see, hear or touch, that force we feel, that we know exists, is law and we know it exists because it is self evident. If it is law then it is self evident, and that is how a law abiding citizen can make a claim to being so. They can make that claim, because regardless of the number of statutes, codes, and ordinances on the book, they know the law, and if any of these statutes, codes and ordinances runs afoul of the law they know so, and they petition the courts for a redress of grievances, they demand justice.

Then how logical is it to expect any child born from today onwards to comply with the rules of the game if they won't live long enough to learn the rules of the game?

It is decidedly illogical to place expectations on an adult, let alone a child. Complying with the rules of the game, is not the same as obeying the law. They are two separate forces, one natural the other artificial. There are no rules in nature only laws, but in civilizations, there are rules, and there are rules, because it is a game. All games come with rules, and offer an outcome of winners and losers, this is the nature of games. The objective in any game, is to win, but if the rules are rigged to create a no win situation, then there is no purpose in playing that game. If it is the only game to play, then change the rules.

FREEDOM does not Equal rules and laws so numerous you don't live long enough to learn them.

It is a truism that with law, we come to understand it better not by looking to see what it is, but by measuring its effect when absent. We understand the importance for justice best in the absence of it, and we understand freedom better in its absence. The United States now has more people in prison, than the Soviet Union did at the height of their tyranny. Are people in the U.S. that criminal, or is this evidence of an obstruction of justice? If it is law, it is self evident.

And what portion of TAX PAYERS money is spent paying Law Makers to make even more laws????

Taxpayer has been statutorily defined and is entirely different than its common usage and how it is defined in dictionaries. Thus, when speaking of the law, particularly when comparing it to the plethora of Bills and Acts of legislation thrust upon the people, it becomes important to understand just how far it has gone, and just how important it is to understand that it has always been we the people, who have held the inherent political power, and it is we the people still. We are presumed to know the law because law is self evident.

There is only reason the term "taxpayer" has become statutorily defined and it is to confound and place a burden upon the people. While there are limitations to freedom and those limitations can be understood naturally by recognizing negative rights. Positive rights are those rights we all hold, and negative rights are those rights we don't hold, and are recognizable in that they disparage the rights of others. All rights are universal, just as all laws are. All people have rights and not one right can have authority over another. It is the task of government to protect those rights not place undue burdens upon the public. They exist to serve we the people, not the other way around.

Why pay them more money to make more laws when they don't or can't enforce existing laws of which no body seems to know all of them anyways?

When we can finally come to an understanding that laws are not made by man but discovered by him, then we can all be expected to know the law. You are all ready presumed to know the law, but in this priest class lawyer controlled legislatures, an aggressive assault has been made upon your liberty, and it is their hope that you will play by their rules rather than insist they obey the law. If you insist on law, then you are changing the rules of the game to one you actually have a chance of winning. Which is the better option? It is self evident.

i'm concerned for the future, and the mayhem we are leaving to them to clean up after.

Then do something about that now! Learn the law so that you are better equipped to combat their alienesque legalese and games of distraction and misdirection. There is a reason our Founders created a Constitution, including our state founders and theirs, that place considerable constraints upon government. Those constraints are not suggestions, they are not rules, they are not, however, natural law, as they are laws written to create government, an artificial construct that exist because we the people allow it. They are binding as law in every sense of the word, and it is that law, that your children need to know.

It is the Constitution for the United States of America that is the Supreme Law of the Land, it is the state constitutions in which our children live, that they need to know, and it is the natural laws of the universe they need to know. It is the common law principles passed to us since time immemorial, and the long history of American Jurisprudence that they need to know, instead of wasting their time making them learn dubious history legends, and teaching civics with pro-government agenda, make sure your children learn how to read case law, and come to know crucial Supreme Court rulings that have held staunchly in the favor of liberty and individual rights. Know this, and you will know the law, your children will, and in the end the law will set you free.

Well chosen topic!

"FREEDOM. It is a yang worship word you will not speak it!" (TV)

WE Americans get religious about our concept of freedom and rational discussion is nearly impossible due to the powerful emotions involved.
We are absolutely nuts about the concept of freedom. We may not agree on how to define it but we'll all know it when we see it.

SO here goes: Freedom is a concept like any other. We may choose the experience or not, it is within our perception. While we all feel the constraints of existence (gravity, "money" etc.) we also choose how to respond to those constraints, how we feel about them. Freedom is one thought away from your present state of mind.

ghostrider - "culture jamming" never heard of it - sounds interesting - tell me more!

fizzy1 - I know the answer to your question.

gj

Originally posted by ganjoa
ghostsoldier

- "culture jamming" never heard of it - sounds interesting - tell me more!

Wiki: Culture Jamming

Check out Adbusters... see sig.

[edit on 12/4/10 by ghostsoldier]

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Nice name Jean Paul.
my real name is John Paul.

a lot of similiar sentament, i must agree. i'm still taking in the read but thought i'd respond to at least one piece of your contribution since you put so much into it.

i offer a perception, a simpler way of rounding off infinity if with each advance in technologies we have innumerous more guidelines and laws.

it seems somewhat potentially detramental towards society when the laws dictate what information is shared with the public and what information isn't shared with the public.

and the public doesn't always know what the laws governing the information consists of.

at any rate what i wanted to comment on is:

They are two separate forces, one natural the other artificial.

i think the artificial laws are out of wack with natural laws.

not sure if mankind should be making laws that are against the laws of physics, or if even such a concept would be possible.

just thought you used curious terminology.
They are two separate forces, one natural the other artificial.

Freedom is everything that you take for granted everyday. The ability to live a any city you want, to travel where ever you please, to go to school, to slander the government and not be killed, to say whatever you want (some things do have side effects), to be able to have as many kids as you want, to marry who you please, I could go on and on and on.......

Go to a third world country or somewhere that isn't "free"and live there for a year or so, then you will know what freedom is. We take our freedom for granted everyday and yet people still say there is no freedom. It is not that there is no freedom to you, it is just that you have not expierienced having NONE.

[edit on 13-4-2010 by Reign02]

Originally posted by Reign02

Go to a third world country or somewhere that isn't "free"and live there for a year or so, then you will know what freedom is. We take our freedom for granted everyday and yet people still say there is no freedom. It is not that there is no freedom to you, it is just that you have not expierienced having NONE.

Having served for eleven years in the military and having spent almost 4 years of my life in third world warzones i assure you i have accumilated experiences that gives provides me with some insight as to what you are getting at.

Please don't think the information i share is out of ignorance. I do have a background to my ideals, and reasons for them.

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher


We should most certainly not be making any laws that defy those of physics. Imagine legislating Pi to be rounded out to 3.0

The distinction I was trying to make between artificial and natural force, was that law has force, and when instituting governments, constitutions are written as law to have the same force and weight as law, even though they be merely artificial in their construct. Voting is not a right, it is a privilege we enact as law carrying the same weight as law. If most artificial laws are restrained to simply restraining government, then we can avoid the plethora of artificial laws we are faced with today.

Freedom is simple. You are free to do as you please as long as you do not oppress anyone or violate thier rights, and honor your agreements. All problems can be easily judged on that basis. Your rights stop where mine begin as someone once said.

The worst criminal knows it's wrong to lie, cheat, steal, rape, plunder, and murder etc. He just doesn't give a damn. You do any of those you are oppressing someone.

This is natural law. The myriads of so called laws we have today are not laws they are corporate statutes designed for profit of the state and or to protect markets for the politically connected somehow or another. If there is no injured man or women making a claim of such there is no crime period!

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher


I feel ya, I have also spent many years in the military and I see what you are saying.

Originally posted by hawkiye

The worst criminal knows it's wrong to lie, cheat, steal, rape, plunder, and murder etc. He just doesn't give a damn. You do any of those you are oppressing someone.

Yet, as an American doesn't our actions and behaviors on the International level do all these things?

How many nations have military bases inside America?
How many nations have American military bases in them?

We are using resources from other countries that we currently own because of our lying, cheating, stealing, plundering, murdering, etc in our acts of war.

And we do these things in the name of freedom, while we define freedom as a set of laws so numerous we don't live long enough to learn them????

I don't want to participate with others to break laws, or be a hipocrite, but unfortunatley to the world view Americans are just that, hipocrites.

It isn't what the law means to a lawyer or a judge, it is what the law is interpreted to the individual, even the child in grade school.

For instance:

The Copyright Laws

We are taught in school that our minds, our bodies, and even our very dna are working together to be an effective information storage and retrieval system dependant upon electrical and bio-mechanical means.

Yet the Copyright Laws on the first pages of every textbook in school plainly reads:

No part of this book may reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the publisher

I know my mind, body, and very dna are information storage and retrieval systems.

The Law says ignorance of the law is no excuse, yet ignorance of the law is the law...

In order to be a law abiding citizen by my society's standards and also retain any testbook knowledge from my elementary school years, the law says i must recieve written permission from the publishers, who are all dead.

I see a problem with the laws if it is the law i need permission from the dead publishers in order to store and retrieve any knowledge in the school books.

In which case, if i don't have written permission from the publishers, even utilizing the very words i was taught right now could be considered illegal, since i learn it from books without written permission from the publishers.

It could be percieved in such a way, and thus contradictory towards progress, growth, and learning.

freedom to me is not having anyone able to make me do anything i dont want to do. thats why i believe we have no freedom. but hey im just a kid what ya gonna do?

I'm curious to see how posters define freedom.

I just think there are aspects of our actions and behaviors that are not beneficial towards having freedom.

I think laws are defined by peoples fears of what consequences their imagination can come up with and what they would hate to lose or hate to happen.

Laws seem to be defined by society's fears and hates.

Fears and hates have only the impact upon our opninion that we allow.

Opinions are defined by priorities
Priorities are defined by our intentions
Intentions are defined by our opinions

Seems like a dog chasing it's own tale.
what does the dog do with it's tail when it catches it?
Laws seem like self canablistic mechanisms to me.

Every advance in technology leads to more and more laws.

Consider the Laws governing Televisions.
I imagine there are many laws regulating and governing TV manufacturing and broadcastings alone.

If information itself were under a "marshal law" variant, would the public even know, or be informed of the information blackout?

Secret, Top Secret, etc

Originally posted by chaseninja
freedom to me is not having anyone able to make me do anything i dont want to do. thats why i believe we have no freedom. but hey im just a kid what ya gonna do?

I think it would be irresponsible of me to say laws shouldn't serve as a guideline for standard operating principals in society.

I would be lying if i were to say i don't see how some laws contradict other laws.

I don't see how some laws are compatible with others, and this is just confusing to me, so i assume it would also be confusing to younger people, ie "just a kid".

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher


you may have misunderstood me it doesnt confuse me. you asked for what i thought freedom was thats what i believe freedom is. do i think we should have that complete freedom? no i know how laws can help.