Relevant repost. It's astounding how many people still don't understand how this "freedom" thing is supposed to work.

jsalazar3 · 4 months

I think someone on reddit said it pretty clearly once: Your freedom and rights end when they begin to violate another person's freedom and rights. Sure some of the sleuths on here can find the exact quote.

bracomadar · 4 months

As the guy who actually made this, most people would figure I'd be pissed someone would repost my content, but it's an honor someone would remember this and repost it at this time. You just made my day :)

mystikarts · 4 months

In most cities you are not free to use your gun at all; for ANYTHING. If someone points a gun at you and you fire off a charge that scares them away, you're going to jail in most cities.

therascalking · 4 months

I always liked Utah Phillips take on freedom:

“The state can't give you freedom, and the state can't take it away. You're born with it, like your eyes, like your ears. Freedom is something you assume, then you wait for someone to try to take it away. The degree to which you resist is the degree to which you are free...”

Darrian · 4 months

Guns and bibles are a bit similar... I mean if you carry one openly in public people are probably going to avoid you.

give_a_drummer_some · 4 months

Worst case: You are free to use a gun to end anothers religion

goggimoggi · 4 months

Very concise and clear. The problem, in my opinion, is that the left is pretty good at applying that logic to social rights and the right is decent at applying that logic to property rights, at least in their rhetoric. What we need to do is abolish the mindset that the dichotomy is left vs. right and realize that the issue is actually the state vs. the individual. We should have freedom socially and fiscally and no person or group of people has the right to use force preemptively against anybody else.

JakOswald · 4 months

Hey, this is about North Carolina, leave California out of this; we've had our turn at country-wide shame on this issue and we're working on fixing the issue.

Man_with_the_Fedora · 4 months

I need to share this, I'm so excited.

I posted this picture on my facebook, and my brother shared it. My brother is very religious, and other than my grandmother was the last person I'd have imagined would have agreed to this. My excitement level right now, knowing that my brother is rational, is immeasurable.

jimpy · 4 months

the OP makes it sound like this is obvious or self evident. but his point is contentious. "you are not free to harm others" isnt freedom so you must either say there are rules that must limit freedom or embrace freedom and say "freedom is the ability to do anything including harm others."

emad154 · 4 months

Well, at least you have the courtesy to admit that you reposted...

whiteknight521 · 4 months

Actually people seem pretty free to use their religion to take away people's rights. Happens all the time.

Xvyto · 4 months

Exactly, the definition of freedom is having your rights, until you encroach on others' rights. Its like the Westboro baptist church: they spew some of the most despicable messages, and have every right to speak them. But this, this NC bill, is one group's views unequivocally ignoring the right thing, the thing that would promote freedom.

DirtyMonday · 4 months

Ahh, that describes Manifest Destiny perfectly. Well, that contradicts Manifest Destiny perfectly. Take your gun and religion and ride west, it's God's plan afterall

guyver_dio · 4 months

The image allows for contradictory scenarios to develop. Say you have a religion where it is your duty to align others to the 'true' belief. Then you don't have a freedom to have that particular religion.

The general point to get across is, without sufficient reason and evidence you are free to believe and practice whatever you like so long as it is not imposed on others.

typtyphus · 4 months

insert troll, of religion isn't allowed to take away ones' freedom, then isn't religion not allowed?

LucianLutrae · 4 months

I wonder how long it would be until somebody gets fed up enough to use the first freedom mentioned to eliminate the second? The whole country seems to be on the brink of a violent revolution, and misuse of "religious freedom" may be one of the tipping points.

XenrexOriginal · 4 months

It's astounding how many people still don't understand how this freedom thing is supposed to work.

felicityrc · 4 months

RAmen

grumpybadmanners · 4 months

This is such a dumb and over simplistic take on "freedom". Americans are obsessed with freedom in this simple minded sense.

So let me try to break it down in simple terms. A society can pay lip service to freedom and guarantee in law all the freedoms in the world but if the population can't enjoy the intended outcome of having those freedoms it's useless.

Crudely exemplified, the freedom to own a gun is not relevant to a society of blind people or people with no hands. What is the purpose of being free to own a gun? let's say the purpose of owning a gun is personal safety. Laws should then be passed that actually increase people's personal safety regardless of whether or not you end up with the right to own a gun.

I don't know whether it's safer to have more or less gun control and I don't know if anybody knows. The point is someone should find out and then laws should be made accordingly.

Freedom is instrumental, it's a "heuristic" a voucher for something else. People need to stop being obsessed with freedom and focus on outcome.

Life, Libery and Pursuit of Happiness is a false trichotomy, what is the point of life or liberty if you're alive to be free to suffer? Fundamentally the only freedoms that really matters are your freedom to not suffer, freedom to not starve, freedom to not be unhappy. We should pass whatever laws are necessary to guarantee those even if that means you can't own certains things or do certain things.

edit: grammar

brezzz · 4 months

Uh, no. You are absolutely free to use your religion, or whatever, to influence election and public opinion, even to the point of taking away freedoms that are not explicitly asserted. It was just done. Maybe the law is unconstitutional, it might even be overturned, but the point still stands, it was just done, Nobody who voted is having that right taken away, the legitimacy of their right to vote is not in question, at all. Doing it with a gun is clearly different, as it violates a person's freedom through force as opposed to an inherently more fair (but not perfect), legal system of democracy. The outcome was not what was right, this is clear, but you can't go around comparing voting based on a deeply seated belief to using a gun to impose your will.

DondeEstaLaDiscoteca · 4 months

That first part is a bit controversial.


New posts:	New	Rising
Self posts:	New	Relevant
Non-image posts:	New	Relevant


GodlessWomen	YoungAtheists	AtheistParents
BlackAtheism	AtheistGems	DebateAnAtheist
skeptic	agnostic	freethought
antitheism	humanism	Hitchens
a6theism10	tfbd	AdviceAtheists

Events
10/5-6	NAPCON2012 - Boston
08/11	Regional Conference - St. Paul MN

Ex* Groups
ex-Muslim	ex-Catholic	ex-Mormon
ex-JW	ex-Jew	ex-SistersinZion
ex-Bahai	ex-Christian	ex-Adventist

atheism

Help Atheist Organizations!

MODERATORS

atheism

Help Atheist Organizations!

MODERATORS

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login