Speaking of freedom in the political sense of the word...to what extent, if any, are our freedoms upheld by the morality of the majority of the people who live in our society?
Can a continual, general moral decline in our society have an effect on our freedom? If so, how?
Here's my take...
Every society has a basic structure of laws it lives by, as in, you're not allowed to commit murder, you're not allowed to steal, etc.. These are basic foundational laws that the majority (minus some law breakers) all agree with.
I'll call these foundational laws "pillars". These pillars are what gives a society structure so it can live in peace and with justice. In between these "pillars" is our freedoms. We don't have laws in place for every thought and action we have. This area between the pillars (our freedom) is upheld by the morality of the people.
When there is a moral decline, whether induced, embraced or both...
Option #1, do nothing. When there is a moral decline, whether induced, embraced or both, I believe that eventually the pillars begin to decay as a result, as we see today, child molesters will be set free with minimum punishment, murderers will be called victims, etc. This WILL result in a total collapse of our society from within and as a result, destroy the area between the pillars, our freedoms with it.
Option #2, make laws. When ever someone is pushing the envelope, so to speak, for whatever reason, laws can be made, but this results in more pillars, resulting in less freedom. Now, having said that, there will be laws created as a country progresses and becomes more complex, or grows, to a degree, this is part of the natural process. I'm speaking specifically about laws set in place to stop a moral decline. As I said before, this results in our losing freedom.
Option #3, live a moral life as an example, be willing to sacrifice comforts for your stance, elect moral leaders. Hope for the best.
I believe that morality and freedom go hand in hand. I don't want to over kill either, because we cannot overlook the individual rights (properly interpreted) of each individual.
The majority, in a democracy, should have a voice in structuring the society that they want to live in, but at the same time not violating any individual rights of any others. Concerning option #2, in it's most technical sense it is taking away our freedom, but this enters into the area where we must look further. If it doesn't interfere with individual rights, doesn't the majority have the right to set these boundaries?
I think that the majority have lost their voice in this country, and the minority (speaking in terms of moral issues) is, and has been, dictating to the majority for many years, while at the same time removing or violating not only individual rights from the those individuals within the majority, but the rights of the majority in general.
What say you?
Can a continual, general moral decline in our society have an effect on our freedom? If so, how?
Here's my take...
Every society has a basic structure of laws it lives by, as in, you're not allowed to commit murder, you're not allowed to steal, etc.. These are basic foundational laws that the majority (minus some law breakers) all agree with.
I'll call these foundational laws "pillars". These pillars are what gives a society structure so it can live in peace and with justice. In between these "pillars" is our freedoms. We don't have laws in place for every thought and action we have. This area between the pillars (our freedom) is upheld by the morality of the people.
When there is a moral decline, whether induced, embraced or both...
Option #1, do nothing. When there is a moral decline, whether induced, embraced or both, I believe that eventually the pillars begin to decay as a result, as we see today, child molesters will be set free with minimum punishment, murderers will be called victims, etc. This WILL result in a total collapse of our society from within and as a result, destroy the area between the pillars, our freedoms with it.
Option #2, make laws. When ever someone is pushing the envelope, so to speak, for whatever reason, laws can be made, but this results in more pillars, resulting in less freedom. Now, having said that, there will be laws created as a country progresses and becomes more complex, or grows, to a degree, this is part of the natural process. I'm speaking specifically about laws set in place to stop a moral decline. As I said before, this results in our losing freedom.
Option #3, live a moral life as an example, be willing to sacrifice comforts for your stance, elect moral leaders. Hope for the best.
I believe that morality and freedom go hand in hand. I don't want to over kill either, because we cannot overlook the individual rights (properly interpreted) of each individual.
The majority, in a democracy, should have a voice in structuring the society that they want to live in, but at the same time not violating any individual rights of any others. Concerning option #2, in it's most technical sense it is taking away our freedom, but this enters into the area where we must look further. If it doesn't interfere with individual rights, doesn't the majority have the right to set these boundaries?
I think that the majority have lost their voice in this country, and the minority (speaking in terms of moral issues) is, and has been, dictating to the majority for many years, while at the same time removing or violating not only individual rights from the those individuals within the majority, but the rights of the majority in general.
What say you?