YOU'RE PROBOBLY ASKING YOURSELF, 'what the heck is this about?'
I'LL START WITH A COUPLE OF QUOTES;

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
Thomas Jefferson,

"Patterning your life around other's opinions is nothing more than slavery."
Lawana Blackwell

"Freedom is like air, you breathe it in and never thought of it until its gone."
anon

"Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end."
Lord Acton

"Man is free at the moment he wishes to be"
Voltaire

"'Eternal Vigilence is the Price of Liberty' used to mean we watched the government -- not the other way around."
Bill Stewart

"Freedom is something that dies unless it is used."
Hunter S. Thompson

"Easy isn’t for the free. Easy is for the willfully confined. So how easy do you want it?"
Matthew Good

"If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money it values more, it will lose that, too."
W. Somerset Maugham

"Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security, will not have, nor do
they deserve, either one."
Benjamin Franklin

~~sorry about that, had more of those than i thought. but they set the proper mood for this thread. bear with me here.~~

FREEDOM:
The condition of being free of restraints. Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.

Political independence.

Exemption from the arbitrary exercise of authority in the performance of a specific action; civil liberty: freedom of assembly.

Exemption from an unpleasant or onerous condition: freedom from want.

The capacity to exercise choice; free will: We have the freedom to do as we please all afternoon.

Ease or facility of movement: loose sports clothing, giving the wearer freedom.

Frankness or boldness; lack of modesty or reserve: the new freedom in movies and novels.

The right to unrestricted use; full access: was given the freedom of their research facilities.

The right of enjoying all of the privileges of membership or citizenship: the freedom of the city.

A right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference: "the seductive freedoms and excesses of the picaresque form" (John W. Aldridge).

LIBERTY:
The condition of being free from restriction or control.

The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing.

The condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor.

Freedom from unjust or undue governmental control.

A right or immunity to engage in certain actions without control or interference: the liberties protected by the Bill of Rights.

A breach or overstepping of propriety or social convention.

A statement, attitude, or action not warranted by conditions or actualities: a historical novel that takes liberties with chronology.

An unwarranted risk; a chance: took foolish liberties on the ski slopes.

A period, usually short, during which a sailor is authorized to go ashore. ^
_____________________________________________________________________________

these are the ones i am concerned with:

The condition of being free from restriction or control.

The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing.

The condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor.

Freedom from unjust or undue governmental control.

A right or immunity to engage in certain actions without control or interference

The condition of being free of restraints. Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.

Political independence.

Exemption from the arbitrary exercise of authority in the performance of a specific action; civil liberty

The capacity to exercise choice; free will
____________________________________________________________________________

i believe in a perfect world we would need no laws, no govenment, no cops, but we dont live in that perfect world so i think that the replublic form of government is best.
note that i said republic, not democratic, and there is a differance:

REPUBLIC:
A political order whose head of state is not a monarch and in modern times is usually a president.
A nation that has such a political order.
A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them.
A nation that has such a political order.
(^^the U.S. is supposed to be one of these^^)

DEMOCRACY:
Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
A political or social unit that has such a government.
The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
Majority rule.<<<<<<<(the main differance)
The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.
(^^not one of these^^there are good qualites there but not for a federal government)
____________________________________________________________________________


so after all that i ask some questions:
there are many degrees of freedom, outright freedom to total slavery, communism/fasism to replublic/democracy. is there to much freedom? how much is enough? who should have what power?; but basicly, what do you think qualfies as a 'free socity'? and how would your free socity act/function?
WHAT IS YOUR FREEDOM?

~Ajax~

An autocracy is a form of government in which the political power is held by a single individual.

The term democracy is commonly used to describe a form of government in which it is recognized that ultimate authority belongs to the people, who have the right to participate in the decision-making process and to appoint and dismiss their rulers.
----the u.s. is a little of this^and a lota the following:
In a broad definition, a republic is a state or country that is led by people whose political power is based on >principles< that are not beyond the control of the people of that state or country.

The term theocracy is commonly used to describe a form of government in which a religious intitution such as a church, temple or mosque also governs. The organs of the religious sphere typically replace
or dominate the organs of civil government as clerical or spiritual representative(s) of god

Oligarchy (Greek ?????????) is a form of government where most or all political power effectively rests with a small segment of society (typically the most powerful, whether by wealth, family, military strength, ruthlessness, or political influence

A confederation is an association of sovereign states or communities, usually created by treaty but often later adopting a common constitution. Confederations tend to be established for dealing with critical
issues, such as defence, foreign affairs, foreign trade, and a common currency, with the central government being required to provide support for all members. A confederation, in modern political terms, is usually limited to a permanent union of sovereign states for common action in relation to other states[1].
------thats more like it^^

A federation (Latin: foedus, covenant) is a union comprised of a number of partially self-governing states or regions united by a central ("federal") government. In a federation, the self-governing status of the component states are typically constitutionally entrenched and may not be altered by a unilateral decision of the central government.
------ah-ha! there it is!^^^


anarchy - rule by no one
democracy - rule by majority
oligarchy - rule by minority
autocracy - rule by one
republic - rule by law
federation - rule by local governments
confederation - local governments united
_____________________________________________________________________________

the enemy of freedom is power, spicificaly, authority.
Main Entry: au·thor·i·ty
Pronunciation: &-'thär-&-tE, o-, -'thor-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
Etymology: Middle English auctorite, from Anglo-French auctorité, from Latin auctoritat-, auctoritas opinion, decision, power, from auctor
1 a (1) : a citation (as from a book or file) used in defense or support (2) : the source from which the citation is drawn b (1) : a conclusive statement or set of statements (as an official decision of a court) (2) : a decision taken as a precedent (3) : TESTIMONY c : an individual cited or appealed to as an expert
2 a : power to influence or command thought, opinion, or behavior b : freedom granted by one in authority : RIGHT
3 a : persons in command; specifically : GOVERNMENT b : a governmental agency or corporation to administer a revenue-producing public enterprise <the transit authority>
4 a : GROUNDS, WARRANT <had excellent authority for believing the claim> b : convincing force <lent authority to the performance>


the power to influence or command thought, opinion, or behavior; isn't that disterbing? people often talk about the govenment having to much power, yay, the have power, they have the nukes, that's good, but do the have the authority to use them? no 'they', don't one man does, and that man lives a life that is an open book, as it should be.too much authority in one person's hands is overwhelming, that power WILL go to their head.
the ones that have authority are watched, or they should be, if they are not.
people will look out for their own intrests, they will look out for their family, freinds, and neagbors.
however when that 'caring' exstends to inserting ones nose into biusness that is not theirs, that is where the constituion limits you, that is what that important document does.it doesn't restrict what you can do, it restricts what others can do too you.

~Torbin~

all this talk about the fed protecting people, the only one the fedral government is supposed to protect us from is OUTSIDE threat, not from our own stupididty.
we have the right in this (or are suposed to) country to make our own choices, with that freedom comes responsilbilty for ones own actions. to take away the responsibility for those actions is to take away the freedom to choose it in the first place.i dont want a 'caring' government. any man that says he is out for your best intrests is either a life-long very good friend, or a lier.i do not trust some wacko in washington with my future.
work together with your family to build the future, many families work together to bulid a community, many communitys come together to build a state, the fed is then supposed to protect those states from OUTSIDE threats. not oversee those states. communitys. families.FDR was wrong, the buck stops down there, not with the president.

in order to get along in a group(often known as society) we must agree that certain things are wrong. in ages past these 'wrong' things were layed down by religion(a.k.a the ten comandments) society agreed that stealing, killing, and lieing were bad. here's the kicker,some wanted to know 'why is killing wrong?' and the only answer they could think of was 'god'.(i sum up thousands of years of history there so don't poke fun, i know its not that simple)and for a while it worked, the punishment from some 'higher source' to put the fear of god into them.(pun intended)but we have now reached a point in human history where we once again dought the existance of god and people scramble to find god whereever thay can.the mithos of god will not die, it is far to strong,(and it doesnt have to, some people need it) but a balance MUST be found between the science and the spirit.

differant levels of each help differant types of people.i for one am mostly science based but i do have a spiritual side or i wouldn't feel the need to defend it. the closest annalogy to what i believe is a close to the star wars 'force'. i belive there is a force for good/life and a force foe evil/death, except its not so black and white.pure evil is rare, and so is pure good. the world is mostly shades of grey.that is my believe.if you require more spiritual believes then fine, but we have moved past having them as a foundation for a society.and when enough people realise that ther will be a major culture shift. wether that will be good or bad depends on the people at the time.

but looking at our (human) history the most likely responce will be a crackdown(loss of freedom), it is the responce to that crackdown that will determine the future after that. will we take it? or will we take a page out of the book of the founders of the United States? and rise to a new tomorrow?

~Ajax~

lets say this is the same as suicide, thats what Euthanasia is, assisted suicide.the most baisic freedom is choice, the most basic choice is life/death.the question one should ask (when restricting a freedom) is,
'does this act impair the existence of someone else.'
note i said existence, not happieness. one has the right to pursue happieness, NOT to not be unhappy.
in my country we've lost that meaning, we now think we have the right to not be offended(offended=unhappieness) no, something in life WILL offend, like say the loss of a loved one due to 'self-termination'(actual medical term)
if one is emotinaly balanced, and willing to do it in a way that will not infringe on others, (like, pay for their own funeral)they should be allowed to end their own life. with help if they so choose.
(i think the act of planing their own funeral would stop most)
maybe have a three month waiting period, like buying a gun.

"Beware those that live in the past, they are doomed to repeat it. Beware also those that live in the future, the now may escape them. If you make the present a good place, the future will see to itself and the past will be revealed."

~Ajax Torbin~