bauglir -- that completely misses my point, and is devoid of context -- but whatever.
well, let's first establish some baseline definitions (that is, at least in respect to this particular discussion):
"liberty" -- I like the "definition" that was posed earlier on this thread -- freedom of choice (which, in and of itself, could be further discussed).
"nanny-state" -- when the gov't "provides" for its people, en lieu of encouraging self-reliance.
some other baseline assumptions:
- within a "free" society, one cannot exercise their liberty to the point of violating someone else's liberty -- otherwise, said society is not really free. hence the phrase "your rights end where mine begin".
- allowing the gov't to have power/control over an aspect of your life (regardless of degree), is, by definition, trading away a piece of your liberty.
Now, I believe that the government's role is pretty much:
- protect the rights of its citizens
- provide for the common defense
Properly motivated, we (as citizens) can pretty much take care of the rest. Sure, it takes a lot of work and self-discipline, but that's the point -- this is the source of exceptionalism, which drives innovation, progress, advancement, etc.
The idea of the gov't providing options also means that the gov't controls what options are available, and how those options are to be exercised. Where's the liberty in that?
But guess what? When ever the gov't decides to provide for a certain aspect of our lives, then they have just disincentive-ized people to provide for themselves. By disincentive-izing this self-reliance, you have just created the environment for people to hand-over their responsibility in this aspect of their lives. And, as is the nature of incrementalism, we don't do this all at once -- it happens a little at a time.
This reminds me of 2 quotes on this one (and yes, I do indeed throw around a lot of quotes -- it helps to provide some context as to why such ideas are important):
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have." -- (while Gerald Ford said this at one point, the original quote has been so often misattributed that I can't reliably say who originally said it)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQ7LcplfkgY
(fast-forward to about 2:05)
Also, throw in the previously-stated Franklin quote (though, there seems to be some discrepancy as to whether it was "safety" or "security").
What is the point of that? Well, how often is that a gov't will voluntarily give up power once it has seized it? The gov't is constantly passing new laws and regulations that give them more power, and most of it done without us knowing about it until it is way too late (rarely is any one bit overwhelming, but it is an accumulation that hurts).
ARGH -- I hate having to go to work -- I'll be back later tonight.
in the meantime, I'll leave you with these
Also, the reason I keep going back to these same people, is that they all warned us about all the b.s. that we have going on today.
c-ya in about 10 hours.