# Freedom Vs. Security **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 27, 1999, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freedom-vs-security/16635 "1999-07-27T23:57:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 1999, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freedom-vs-security/16635/21 "1999-07-29T13:43:00Z")
Dr. Jackson said: > [@](#): > > Examples in the way of explanation: > -If a smoker continually blows smoke in your face, can you sue him/her for violating your right to breathe clean air? As you know, you can sue for pretty much _anything_. Whether or not it makes it through the system, well, who knows? But in this case, it would depend on the situation. As I said, there is a difference between smoking in public and in private (and private includes privately-owned places where the owner decides to allow it). So if you go to somebody’s house and they do this, too bad. But if you’re in a public place and they do it, you should have recourse to get them to stop (suing is a bit far, but calling a guard at a courthouse or something would make sense). > [@](#): > > -Is a citizen entitled to free shelter or food? Can you get a driver’s license free of charge? Just a quick note that, although you addressed this to me and pld, I did not challenge you on these portions of your previous post. However: > [@](#): > > My litmus test for rights vs. privileges is “Can the government outlaw it, tax it, or charge a fee for it?” if the answer is “Yes”, then it ain’t a right. As Jayron notes, you are confusing what our government will allow with what rights are. If our government decided to void the 1st Amendment, would that mean we no longer have a right to free speech? No, we still have the right, but it is simply not being recognized by the government. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 1999, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freedom-vs-security/16635/22 "1999-07-30T05:54:00Z")
Jason says: > [@](#): > > You are confusing what our government will allow us to do under the present system and what are true rights. The government can impose fines (and DOES I might add) on people who flagrantly disregard public smoking laws. As such, it IS protecting your rights. I believe it is you who is confused. In the case above the government is enforcing the law, not protecting your rights. Some laws are in place to protect your rights, others are there to enforce societal mores and have nothing to do with rights. > [@](#): > > Everyone is entitled to work for their own gain - Jason Nope. An extreme example would be someone who is physically incapacitated and has only a rudimentary ability to communicate (blink once for ‘yes’, twice for ‘no’). Are they _entitled_ to work? No. Are they entitled to life? Yes. Liberty? Yes. To vote? Yes. A right is something which cannot be denied even unto the “least of us”. > [@](#): > > The government chooses not to charge taxes on certain rights because it finds doing so politically prudent. Jason and > [@](#): > > Remember, rights are what you are allowed to do should you have the resources to do it. Jason Absolutely wrong! An “inalienable” right is just that. It cannot be denied _anyone_. Courts have ruled that charging or taxing rights excludes those too poor to pay from exercising those rights. That is why poll taxes were abolished and why the government must provide you an attorney if you cannot afford one. > [@](#): > > In so far as the government is the entity which has funded the construction of the roads in this country, they have the right to decide what to do with those roads. If you have some property, and on that property you decide to build a road, you should be able to let who ever the heck you wish to drive on said road. You are comparing apples and oranges. As has been stated in a previous thread, rights are how government must relate to its citizens; laws are how citizens must relate to each other. Sometimes they’re the same, sometimes not. I can make you pray as a condition of entering my house. The government cannot make you pray to enter a public building. > [@](#): > > Rights are not what you are entitled to recieve from others, including the government - Jason Rights are _exactly_ what you are entitled to expect from the government. > [@](#): > > We as citizens are entitled to education only because it is our money that goes towards that education in the form of taxes. -Jason No, again, though arguably. After more thought I have changed my mind. I contend that we have made primary education a right in this country because it is available to all children regardless of whether their family pays taxes. Today, primary education cannot be denied any child. > [@](#): > > As Jayron notes, you are confusing what our government will allow with what rights are. If our government decided to void the 1st Amendment, would that mean we no longer have a right to free speech? -DavidB Actually, the answer is “Yes”. As Phil noted in his answer to Jason, all of these “rights” are political inventions (and good ones at that!). They do not exist in nature. Therefore, if the political body that “protects” these rights for its citizens decides to no longer recognize them, then for all intents and purposes those rights cease to exist. * * * The overwhelming majority of people have more than the average (mean) number of legs. – E. Grebenik ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 1999, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freedom-vs-security/16635/23 "1999-07-30T04:32:00Z")
pld: > [@](#): > > The first is that there is some collection of a priori “right” and “wrong” actions which apply to what > the government can or can’t do (or should or shouldn’t do). Is this what you are saying? And, if so, > where do they come from? and Dr. J. > [@](#): > > Actually, the answer is “Yes”. As Phil noted in his answer to Jason, all of these “rights” are political > inventions (and good ones at that!). They do not exist in nature. Therefore, if the political body that > “protects” these rights for its citizens decides to no longer recognize them, then for all intents and > purposes those rights cease to exist. OK… Here goes. Rights exist because they come from our nature as humans. Every living thing has adaptations that allow it to survive, both as an individual and as a species. Dogs hunt in packs, that gives them a certain “nature,” a certain set of actions that the dog must commit in order to insure their own survival. All animals have these adaptations, which allow them to eat, mate, etc. etc. If denied any of their basic survival tools, even if provided with food and mate, they suffer. Its why keeping animals in captivity are so tricky. If an animal is denied the ability to practice those things that are in its nature, it will fail to survive. EVEN if provided with all that they need, if their behavior is unnaturally restricted, they suffer and will not survive. Humans have a nature too. Communication is a survival tool for humans. It is an adaptation we have that has allowed us to assume our place in the balance of nature. As such, there is freedom of speech. We lack much instict, we get our behavior through learning, as such we should have the freedom to create for our body the learning experiences that we feel we may need. All rights that people have, as well as all prohibitions on us (such as: we are prohibited to murder others) have developed out of our need to survive as a species, and as individuals. Denial of those things that have given us the power of survival will bring down our species. Thus government, that necessary evil whose purpose is to regulate our survival, must do so in such a way as to not hinder that survival. It must provide us our security, without denying us our freedom. * * * Jason R Remy “Open mindedness is not the same thing as empty mindedness.” – John Dewey _Democracy and Education_ (1916) ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 1999, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freedom-vs-security/16635/24 "1999-07-30T13:31:00Z")
So those people under the authority of Monarchy, Communism, Theocracy, and Dictatorship - where these “basic rights” are denied - will just die out? Historically it certainly doesn’t seem to work that way. * * * The overwhelming majority of people have more than the average (mean) number of legs. – E. Grebenik ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 1999, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freedom-vs-security/16635/25 "1999-07-31T22:37:00Z")
Jason, I must disagree that our rights come from our nature as humans. There are other rights we value that don’t have “survival value”, such as the right to privacy and the right to vote. Although maybe you aren’t including those in your list of basic rights. Anyway, I am with those who say that our rights are what we as society decide they will be. The hard part is deciding them. Ideas like “Your right to swing your hand ends where my nose begins.” are easy to agree with. I think where it gets difficult is when it comes to potential harm vs. actual harm. I think this is the cause of the tension between Freedom and Security. For examples: Shooting someone - should be illegal, no argument. Owning weapons that have potential to harm - this debate goes on. I think AHunter’s view is closest to my own. ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2001, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freedom-vs-security/16635/26 "2001-06-16T21:29:08Z")
Yet another Deeply Philosophical Discussion saved from the pruning-room floor. ::bump:: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freedom-vs-security/16635.md?page=1)