Loss of Freedom in America?
Karen Burke writes:
Yes, the ACLU has so demonized the word American that I fear all of the gays lesbians, terrorists, and criminals they have come to represent would find the name American Civil Liberties Union offensive. We can’t have anybody offended now, can we? In fact, thanks to that organization the word ''American'' is now more offensive than Christ. Hitler and Nazi seem to be quite popular these days, though, not offensive at all to be a genocidal maniac.
I am offended each and every time my liberties are stolen from me because I am a white, heterosexual, Christian. I am offended that I am no longer a free person in the land of the free. I am not free to teach my children of Christ or morality because I might offend the immoral. I am not free to voice my opinion without being accused of racial profiling or charged with a hate crime. ... IT’S CALLED FREEDOM...AND I WANT MINE BACK!
There is one thing that is conspicuous by its absence in all of Burke's perfervid rhetoric: actual examples of how she has lost her freedom or what liberties have been stolen from her. When did someone tell her that she can't teach her children about her god or moral values? When was she told that she would be charged with a hate crime for expressing her opinion?
Such things probably haven't happened. While most people would find themselves discomfited to write about the "loss" of liberties they still have, Karen Burke seems positively shameless in her choleric attacks on others for daring to be "offended." Part of the problem is the fact that while people may talk about certain things "offending" them, ACLU court cases are brought over violations of constitutional protections rather than incivility.
Instead of demanding her "freedom" back, perhaps she should spend more time trying to figure out where she lost her reason and common sense.
Read More:
May I step in for the “defense”?
Ms. Burke might point out that “she” lost her freedom when she is forced at gunpoint to pay for gooferment skoolz. Actually, that freedom was lost a while ago when the gooferment took over the funding and operation of “schooling”.
She can’t teach her children her moral values in today’s environment where the children are taken to gooferment reeducation camps and feed propaganda. Unless she’s rich, she can’t afford to pay the taxes and then forgo the “service” of education. So, she, and others, are hit with a triple whammy. They are force to pay for a shoddy service they don’t want or doesn’t meet their needs. They have their values they are trying to teach their children denigrated in this “service”. AND, they are insulted when they object to the violence and loss of liberty.
This is not just a religious issue. But a racial one. Walter Williams’ has a great quip, “if the grand wizard of the KKK wanted to destroy black children, he could not have come up with a better way than government education”.
It’s a liberty issue. It’s immoral to force people to do things they don’t want to do. If you have to force some one to do something, then you have a “bad idea”. If it’s such a great idea, then you should be able to persuade me with logic, evidence, and testimony. Otherwise, MYOB! When you use force, not only is it immoral, it’s usually ineffective and inefficient as well.
As the risk of being labeled “choleric”: I don’t want to pay to educate other people’s children. I don’t feed them (in most cases). I don’t clothe them. I don’t tuck them in a night. They are not “mine”. Nor are they my responsibility. I don’t what you stealing from me to do it. I do NOT consent!
I do CHOOSE to support certain charities that do those things, but that’s my self-assumed choice. It’s immoral for the ACLU to insist that I do it to favor their agenda. Just as it would be immoral for Ms. Burke to force me to pay for her agenda.
The defense rests,
fjohn
Ferdinand J. Reinke
Kendall Park, NJ 08824
Webform that creates an urgent email => http://2idi.com/contact/=reinkefj
Web page => http://www.reinke.cc/
My blog => http://www.reinkefaceslife.com/
LinkedIn url => http://www.linkedin.com/in/reinkefj
I’d like to see you support this claim.
So?
I do believe that each of us works and pays for our government to operate, Therefore, I would not call these privileges. We pay for the right to live how we want, without unnecessary restrictions on our freedom.
What, precisely, do you mean by “these”? Can you cite any examples?
The author is an idiot.
Feel free to show how.
The situation of today slays me. For example, children can’t pray in school. Somebody said that, they even made it a law. So, everybody obeys. No more prayer. Oh my, we could get into trouble if we continue to do that. While it’s pretty much accepted Got wants us to obey the laws of the land, this doesn’t mean for His followers to disregard those things He wants us to do even if it is contrary to the laws of man. It seems to me if we give up our children’s right to pray, anytime and anywhere they choose, then we weren’t really weren’t so commited to begin with.
That may be because you don’t actually understand the situation – everything you say about the “situation” is false.
Yes, they can.
No, they didn’t.
Someone told you that and you believed them instead of checking it out for yourself.
No, they don’t. People still pray — and what’s more, they get to pray on their own. What stopped was the state writing the prayers and telling people when they should pray.
Yes, state employees would get into trouble if they pretended to have the authority to tell people when to pray, how to pray, what to pray, to whom to pray, or even if they should pray. Is that a problem for you?
So you’re saying that your god wants you to obey the law, except when it contradicts what you think your god wants you to do. Basically, that means you think your god wants you to obey the law so long as its convenient, and then to disregard it when it’s not convenient.
Except the right to pray hasn’t been given up. So long as they aren’t disrupting school functions or bothering other students, they can basically pray whatever they want whenever they want.
It seems to me that if theists insist that an individual’s “right to pray” requires government support through official, government-written prayers and official prayer times, then those theists were never really committed to begin with.
“When did someone tell her that she can’t teach her children about her god or moral values?”
Funny comment, your little “her god” bit really is priceless. How about trying not to offend when your rebuking someone? Christians use the word “God” when refering to their god. Not capitalizing it seems to be a common way agnostics and aethiest try to belttle ones faith in God.
The comment hurts your case and reduces it to school yard banter.
However, Im sick and tired of Christians claiming we can’t pray in school, or that the 10 commandments need to be in a state capitol.
A) No single person, body or entity can keep anyone from praying anywhere they want.
B) I dont want a secular goverment tied to any religion at all.
Freedom for religion and from religous oppression!
Eric
Some atheists do this, but the phrase “her god” is grammatically correct as it refers to whatever deity (”god”) she happens to believe in. It’s analogous to saying “her husband” or “her nation” rather than specifying the particular name of her husband or her nation.
The word “god” should be capitalized only when used as a proper noun.
There is a very good reason for using the more general “her god”: it places her personal beliefs on an equal level with all other theistic beliefs. It does not elevate belief in her god over and above someone else’s belief in their god.
Only with people unfamiliar with proper English grammar, I suppose.
Austin I am afraid you are a fool. Welcome your loss of freedom, but don’t expect me to do the same. I know the kind of person you are. You are freedom hating and most likely a homosexual. You also clearly are ridden with “white guilt” and you fear offending anyone who belongs to a minority group. I’m not and I call it as I see it. Freedom is indeed being stripped from us on a daily basis and if you fail to see that then you truly are a fool.
Feel free to show how, if you can.
I haven’t lost any freedoms, and you don’t identify any freedoms of yours that are threatened.
You don’t know me at all, so I wonder why you feel the need to pretend. Oh, I think I know: you can’t address or rebut any of the arguments I make, so all that’s left to you are superficial, puerile, and personal attacks.
You mean, I don’t approve of treating minorities as if they were inferior? That’s true.
Curious how those “losses” can’t be listed specifically.
Feel free to show how, if you can.
For not seeing the forest for the trees.
I haven’t lost any freedoms, and you don’t identify any freedoms of yours that are threatened.
Sure, there are many. Where to start? How about the health care bill that is going to be forced upon the people. Where I will be forced to get insurance otherwise I will be liable to fines and jail for failure to pay said unlawful fines. That is freedom to you? Sounds like socialism to me. If I want to live my life without insurance that is my prerogative.
The fact that the government can and does know some of the most personal details about my personal life and can listen to any telephone conversation at any time for whatever reason they deem “worthy.”
The fact that we are taxed on every facet of our lives from when we make our money to when we spend it. That sounds like freedom to you?
You don’t know me at all, so I wonder why you feel the need to pretend. Oh, I think I know: you can’t address or rebut any of the arguments I make, so all that’s left to you are superficial, puerile, and personal attacks.
Actually you can tell a lot about a person from the things they write. From what I’ve read, you write well, but I believe that your viewpoints are skewed. Maybe some soul searching would do you well. Sorry, I forgot you don’t believe you have one.
You mean, I don’t approve of treating minorities as if they were inferior? That’s true.
When did I ever say that minorities are inferior? I don’t recall saying that, in fact I believe I said that I am not afraid to say what I think for fear of offending some persons sensibilities. All men are created equal.
Curious how those “losses” can’t be listed specifically.
I have listed a few there are many, many more.
You mean, as is already done with car insurance and some people with flood insurance?
What do you think the definition of socialism is?
Does your state allow you to drive without car insurance?
You do know, don’t you, that this is something the ACLU fight against? Besides, what you describe is “privacy,” not a “freedom.” At most privacy is a “right,” assuming of course you believe that you have a “right to privacy.” Do you?
I don’t find taxes to be an inherent infringement on freedom.
Depends on how much of it you read and how skilled you are at reading comprehension.
Feel free to show how.
Unlike you, you mean?
When did I claim I fear offending anyone who belongs to a minority group?
I haven’t noticed in your comment any actual freedoms that you used to have but have since lost.
You mean, as is already done with car insurance and some people with flood insurance?
That logic is flawed. The minimum I am required to have with regards to auto insurance is liability and with good reason. There is a chance I may deprive someone of life or property should I be at fault in an accident with another vehicle. So by that logic I need liability heath insurance in case I get someone else sick. Superb job comparing apples to oranges.
I don’t find taxes to be an inherent infringement on freedom.
How so? It is an infringement on your financial freedom. If my income was taxed once I wouldn’t have a problem as it is crucial to operating what should be a small and very limited government. However I am taxed when I make my money. Then when I go to the store and purchase something it is taxed yet again. Then because the government is so generous they offer me back what I overpayed during the course of the year as a “refund.” I suppose you like loaning your money interest free?
What do you think the definition of socialism is?
Socialism is the government control and regulation of all resources of a society. While that is all well and good on paper, the reality is it just DOES NOT work.
So many in this country have a sense of entitlement and think that they are owed something. You see all men are created equal. That means they all have an equal chance to make something of themselves. They however, are not equal in the sense that everyone is handed success which is how some . You are what you make yourself.
From what I’ve read, you write well, but I believe that your viewpoints are skewed.
This current post isn’t exactly Athiest related (see I capitalized your belief), but I’ll go for it in what I mean when I said your logic is skewed. The evidence you need for God is all around you. It’s staring you right in the face and that is the Universe and everything in it. The complexity of these systems is just too great for it to be mere chance.
It cannot happen at random. The simple fact that this planet is the perfect distance from this star to harbor life is proof. It is extremely rare for a planet to be in this perfect position.
The systems in place on this planet that keep it from becoming a barren, cold (or hot) chunk of rock in space is another glaring example.
Evolution was created by God and it makes perfect sense. That law was set in place so that the creatures He created on THIS planet (I don’t believe God created only one planet with life and why would He?) would be able to adapt to the changing climate as the Earth itself ages.
The laws of physics. Clearly intelligence went into it’s creation or the Universe would literally tear itself apart. It’s like a programmer cleaning up the bugs in his script or program. If there were no laws governing the physical universe then there would be no point in it’s current state.
The Bible which as I have seen in your blogs you consider a control tool is what it is. A book written by men in all their flaws and imperfections in their interpretation of a perfect God. They didn’t have the technology to explain HOW God does the things he does like Science is beginning to. They could only explain WHAT he did. Now he as given us the tools so that he doesn’t need to create the Scientific conditions for a miracle to occur. That is what I believe a miracle is. At least the good ones we can’t do. It is like a Science experiment that you can’t and don’t have the conditions to replicate it over and over. It will not happen unless He creates those conditions again or gives us the tools to do so in the future through invention. After all He is the Architect of the Universe.
The Heavens and Science are one in the same. It’s all about prospective. He is there and is giving us over time the ability to take care of ourselves without having to pray to him for menial and simple tasks. He wants us simply to appreciate what he has provided for us all until the day we die and rejoin the Universe from which we came with Him in Heaven. It is all linked and it’s obvious to me.
Yes I know my last few paragraphs are off topic in regards to Freedom’s lost in America, back to your reply.
I haven’t noticed in your comment any actual freedoms that you used to have but have since lost.
One doesn’t neccesarily have to lose all freedom for it to be an assault on the Constitution. Anything that limits in anyway my Constitutional rights is a LOSS of FREEDOM.
My right to bear arms to protect my life, property, and family. In my state I was required to get what is a called a Firearm Owner Identification Card (FOID) which goes against the second ammendment of the United States Constitution which states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Many, including some lawyers and judges misinterpret this as only pertaining to Militia. It is actually two rights in one. The right to assemble a militia and the personal right to firearms to protect your life, property, and your rights. You cannot create a militia if you do not have the weapons to do so. “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” means what it means.
Habeus Corpus is non-existant if you should be unfourtunate enough to be called an enemy combatant which believe me at some point in time there will be someone wrongfully accused. It just happens with any government. That is one of the most important rights there is and it was put in place to keep you for being held without being charged with a crime. It literally means to bring me the body, or better yet, bring the accused before me. Now while I couldn’t care much for terrorists denied this freedom that aren’t American what if it does happen to an American? The potential is there and therefore is a loss of freedom.
I really could go on and on. The examples are limitless. There are thousands upon thousands of laws on the books for a supposedly “free” society. If we are so free why so many laws? Some are neccesary, but I am almost certain most are laws that have no place in the United States of America.
Superb job with conveniently ignoring flood insurance.
But regardless, the analogy with car insurance is only flawed if you believe either that being forced to buy insurance isn’t an inherent loss of freedom or, if it is, it’s outweighed by the benefits in this case. Either way, it undermines your complaint that being forced to buy health insurance is a loss of freedom because you don’t explain why it’s a loss of freedom in this case.
Having to pay for anything is an infringement on my financial freedom. I do not, however, have a right to “financial freedom” like I have a right to free speech.
What do you think the definition of socialism is?
That is incorrect. Socialism is government ownership of the means of production. Regardless, feel free to explain how a requirement to buy health insurance is any more “government control and regulation of all resources of a society” than the requirement to buy car or flood insurance.
Right, like people who don’t like to pay taxes.
Do they, in reality?
From what I’ve read, you write well, but I believe that your viewpoints are skewed.
Which is a demonstration of how skewed your own viewpoints are: atheism isn’t a belief and it isn’t a proper noun which is supposed to be capitalized.
Feel free to show how. Yes, our planet is currently at the right distance for life to form, but how is that evidence for a god?
Who has argued that complexity arises from “mere chance”?
OK, prove it.
OK, prove it.
I haven’t noticed in your comment any actual freedoms that you used to have but have since lost.
I didn’t ask for a demonstration that you have lost “all freedom,” just a list of actual freedoms you had but do not have now.
Well, then, take it to court.
And what does it mean, no restrictions or regulations of any sort?
And who is responsible for that?
Remember, this blog post is about an attack on the ACLU for contributing to a loss of freedom, so what do you think the ACLU’s stand is on habeus corpus?
That question only makes sense if one presumes that laws and freedom are necessarily contrary rather than complimentary. Unless and until you can support that premise, the question is irrelevant.
Almost, but not completely – which means you don’t have much of a basis for supporting the premise behind your question.
Look, flood insurance is something required by the bank to get financing should you live in a flood zone. That’s not exactly the government though they do have a hand it in it. You are still comparing apples to oranges and you have no argument.
Car insurance is again a bit different. I don’t have to drive anywhere and as long as I don’t have a vehicle that I am using on public roads then the government cannot force me to do anything.
Forced health care is illegal and against the Constitution. Why is the government making choices for me a good thing? What happened to being responsible for yourself and only to yourself and family? Do you really like such a loss of independence? It just one more step in the fall of a great Republic.
Don’t you see? If you allow these small liberties to be taken away then that makes it all the easier for the more important ones to be taken as well. One day, Austin, you will wake up in chains so to speak and wish you had cherished your freedom and not squandered it away as if it could never be stolen from you.
Do they, in reality?
Yes all men have a chance. I have personally seen people including myself pull themselves from nothing and make something of themselves. You cannot make up for something who flunks out because they are just not cut out for what they thought they could pursue. Or they just don’t know how to get out of their situation or whatever the case is. One cannot blame others for their own situations. Self responsibility.
Right, like people who don’t like to pay taxes.
Fail to see how not liking to pay excess taxes is somehow being entitled to something. Sounds like wanting to pay your fair share and keep what’s truly yours.
My definition of socialism is correct. You basically said the same thing I did. Control would imply ownership.
I didn’t ask for a demonstration that you have lost “all freedom,” just a list of actual freedoms you had but do not have now.
I have listed them. Numerous rights lost. Just because it’s not totally gone doesn’t mean it’s any less significant. This is what people are talking about when they say rights are lost.
And what does it mean, no restrictions or regulations of any sort?
Let’s not be ridiculous here. Of course you don’t want felons or what not getting guns, but that’s what all the checks are there for when you purchase a gun. You are not being infringed upon for the small waiting period when you buy a gun. When you have to wait a month or longer for a “FOID” to come in the mail that is an infringement.
Remember, this blog post is about an attack on the ACLU for contributing to a loss of freedom, so what do you think the ACLU’s stand is on habeus corpus?
Why do we need some group always to affect change in this country? By the people for the people. We don’t need some group to remind us and “fight” of our civil liberties. You’d better know it on your own. The ACLU is nothing but well meaning WACK JOBS. You have to do it right in the first place.
On evolution you can see the sudden and nearly spontaneous explosions of life the first time life appeared and after EACH and EVERY extinction period. That life just didn’t appear out of thin air.
Who has argued that complexity arises from “mere chance”?
Call it what you will. This existence wouldn’t be if something didn’t have a hand in it.
Feel free to show how. Yes, our planet is currently at the right distance for life to form, but how is that evidence for a god?
And it has been for billions of years. The timescale of God is not the timescale of man. You have to remember that. That “7 days” in the Bible IS NOT LITERAL. That 7 days could be 7 billion years, hell even LONGER.
There is probably no way I can convince you that God exists over the net and I really don’t intend to try that hard. I can see it, but if you don’t want to, then more power to you. And yes atheism is a belief. You believe that there is no intelligent design to the universe and therefore is a belief system. You cannot have it both ways.
One doesn’t neccesarily have to lose all freedom for it to be an assault on the Constitution. Anything that limits in anyway my Constitutional rights is a LOSS of FREEDOM.
By this argument one claims the Constitution is taking away freedoms. The govt’s ability to tax is written into the constitution, your states right to tax is written into its constitution. Not all states are equal in this regard, I’m pretty sure there are some states do not have sales tax, there are some states that have no income tax either.
All of these taxes are the right of goverernment written into their respective constitutions, they pay for the services we all use. You may not use these services, you may not like these services, but if you live in a state with said taxes, you are required to pay them according to the constitution.
Fail to see how not liking to pay excess taxes is somehow being entitled to something. Sounds like wanting to pay your fair share and keep what’s truly yours.
Define excess, what would be an equitable tax rate? and why would it be equitable and would it be sufficient to support the country? You would have a strong career in politics if you have these numbers, please share them.
When you have to wait a month or longer for a “FOID” to come in the mail that is an infringement.
I guess you live in Illinois, the law for that card has been in place since 1968 hardly a recent infringement, but in truth is it really an infringement? Did it prevent you from acquiring the firearm you wanted?
I find you to be quite reasonable in regards to firearm background checks, Illinois law requires that you have the FOID within 30 days of the reciept of application and Illinois is the only state I’m aware of with such a long waiting period.
In fact there is no federal waiting period that I’m aware of though there is a background check required by the Brady act. Currently, 92% of Brady background checks through NICS are completed while the FBI is still on the phone with the gun dealer .In rare cases, a gun purchaser may have to wait for up to three business days if the NICS system fails to positively approve or deny his/her application to purchase a firearm. If a denial is not issued within those three days, the transfer may be completed at that time.
So it sounds like the state is your problem, not the federal govt.
I view the public health care option in the same light as our current education system. Government requires all children to be enrolled in some form of education system and, in addition, provides public schools as an option. This is not socialism nor is it illegal or violating the Constitution.
Tom,
You are an intensely ignorant person. Finish reading ‘Going Rogue’ and don’t interrupt. Adults are talking here.
Right-wingers are totally enslaved by their moral and intellectual cowardice and laziness.
It’s interesting how Tom refers to the government as “they” when in a democracy the government is actually “we.”
You might want to worry about how much corporations know about you, about how much power corporations have over your life – what you see, what you do, even what you eat. How much freedom do you have to make them do anything? Even if you are a stockholder? Sorry, they make the rules and donate to the lawmakers who let them.