Primitives Discuss...just about everything but freedom

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Even the most cursory glance at this form reveals Frank's penchant for his "Primitives Discuss..." threads. What should also be noted is...

They discuss jobs, healthcare, welfare, litterbox maintenance, abortion, the environment, etc etc etc ad nauseam with an extra side of nauseam.

Yet, amid all these discussions never does one see them overly concerned with issues such as: is the government encroaching too far into our lives? How do we contain the rot if the program becomes corrupted? Are these really the politicians most concerned with us as their constituents or are they just in it for their own personal power and wealth?

If they won't ask these questions then I have a question of my own:

Do such people--whose only concern is to be provided for absent any discussion of personal freedom or responsibility--really deserve freedom and should they be entrusted with the freedom and liberty of others?

Lurkers, feel free to comment; unlike DU you won't be banned if you mind your manners.

[Carl]

Indeed,they babble on endlessly about what society (government) owes them but never ever what they should contribute back.
I am also curious about that if any lurkers do wish to join the discussion.

What is it that you personally intend to contribute to a society that takes care of your health,housing and food as you claim it should?

[Randy]

But but but it's a right owed to them by God, society, the man, gaia, white people Mother Earth because.....well because they say so. How dare you or anyone even THINK that they should have to contribute!!!!111!!oneoneone1!!eleventy!!!111!

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

But but but it's a right owed to them by God, society, the man, gaia, white people Mother Earth because.....well because they say so. How dare you or anyone even THINK that they should have to contribute!!!!111!!oneoneone1!!eleventy!!!111!

I would like their thought processes are deeper than that but...

...as the OP notes: they don't really seem concerned by anything other than being provided for. I'm sure many would claim altruis, "It's not for MY gain that I want universal healthcare but for the millions of Americans who've grown obese on food stamps!"

Yet, when the polls tank and the people reject such schemes they cry M$M/corporate moles/minority obstructionism.

[Chris_]

If they won't ask these questions then I have a question of my own:

Do such people--whose only concern is to be provided for absent any discussion of personal freedom or responsibility--really deserve freedom and should they be entrusted with the freedom and liberty of others?

I would say:  No, and No........I have long been an advocate of the policy that those receiving any form of government support should not be allowed to vote.......period.......

That said, the liberal response to your question would be that it is a part of our "social contract" that these entitlements be provided, and government encroachment is therefore necessary to facilitate this contract.   I have never seen, nor have I been asked to sign a "social contract"......so the argument is specious, but nonetheless, that is their position.

doc

[The Village Idiot]

exactly. that contract does not exist.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

I would say:  No, and No........I have long been an advocate of the policy that those receiving any form of government support should not be allowed to vote.......period.......

That said, the liberal response to your question would be that it is a part of our "social contract" that these entitlements be provided, and government encroachment is therefore necessary to facilitate this contract.   I have never seen, nor have I been asked to sign a "social contract"......so the argument is specious, but nonetheless, that is their position.

doc

No arguments here.

Of course to such liberal voices I would reply that contracts entail voluntary entrace by all parties concerned and even upon execution no one party has sole power to regulate and enforce any contract.

But that would just be me obsessing over freedom and liberty again.

[Chris_]

No arguments here.

Of course to such liberal voices I would reply that contracts entail voluntary entrace by all parties concerned and even upon execution no one party has sole power to regulate and enforce any contract.

But that would just be me obsessing over freedom and liberty again.

When their entire ideology centers around the assumption that freedom and liberty are abstract concepts, and subject to interpretation (by them, of course), that is generally what you will get.

doc