Topic: how is it possible that the most basic right of freedom is routinely violated? (Read 751 times)

Yeah , but in a normal society , one that puts bad really stuff into his body it's causing harm for everybody else.

Why ?, because money were spent on his education , health , etc , and when it was time to pay back his debts and work for it , it's usually gets thrown in a detox where again money (payed by me and you) are thrown to save the idiot's life , then other moneys are thrown away for psychiatric support and more for it's re-integration into society , which in 90% case fail.

I know a case , unfortunately somewhat close friend for which the family has spent 50k with another 25k help from the government in order to cure their  son with no success.
He didn't cause harm to anybody else rather than his family , but why would so much tax money would be spend on him when people who work often don't have enough food to put on their tables in this country?

Just like when you sentence somebody to prison and the state is paying (in my country) 266% of the average wage per inmate and often offering them condition better than the ones not breaking the law and scraping from one day to another.

No, and that's my point.  Note the bolded part above.  Refer back a hundred years, and there you go.

Abuse and human misery accompanied drugs and prostitution, causing laws against them to be made.  Then yes, "crime" occurred.  But going back to the former state doesn't do away with the oppression and violations of rights, only that part which occurred due to the laws.

A vs B.

The original meaning of republic means the protection of rights of ALL the people, rich or poor does not matter.
Of course you own your body! That's your right. But are you willing to cross that line in the sand and say: "I will kill you if you cross that line infringing on my God-given rights"?
Freedom is not free. The socialists only understand the arms.
To Arms. To Arms. To Arms!

What if they sell it to you? lol

the right to own ones own body doesn't mean the right to own someone elses body

What if I want to eat people? lol.

But I agree, it's none of the governments business when you or I put into our bodies or what we do with them as long as it's not causing harm to any one else.

The crime that happens around drugs and prostitution is because it is illegal, forming a black market. If it was legal it would be as crimeless as walking into a bakery

just something to think about...

what if in some place and time people looked around and saw that some of the most oppressed, with rights routinely violated, were prostitutes?

(pimps, gansters, drugs, etc)

For a right to hold any relevance in society, it must be acknowledged and protected by any who agree upon said right.  Most people don't acknowledge a right over their own body; they give in to the idea of sacrificing their right to individual freedom for the prospect of influencing others.  People agree to sacrifice their right to free speech for the prospect of shutting someone else up.  People agree to sacrifice their right to freely trade their time and energies for the prospect of stopping someone else.  Merely by waving power tied by string to a stick, always unreachable, we slowly relinquish our own capability to practice our own morals and principles so that we can control others to fit the behavior we wished to exhibit within ourselves, but failed to, and only do so out of fear of law--that is, for those of us who aren't enlightened.

But to be frank, I just flatly believe people don't understand how rights work in the first place; you can't help what you don't know.  The first step to resolving a problem is to acknowledge there is at all a problem.

I agree with you, but who decides what the constitutional principles are before the republic is established? There has to be some decision making process, and one self-appointed person shouldn't have that right. George Washington's constitution wasn't perfect, notably in the way that non-whites were not classified as people, so "We the People" did not apply to the indians and the africans.

We need anarchy first. And then, I think we need some set of universal principles, but I also believe that not enough people around the world are knowledgeable or motivated enough to agree to something that's responsible for the long term. We can't keep changing our principles when the old ones turned out to be too short sighted. And the governments have contributed to this situation so much, as modern culture is designed to produce compliant workers, not enthused innovaters or thoughtful philosophisers. We need a full on cultural renaissance, where we equip everyone across all the generations to have the knowledge and the reasoning skills to decide the basics. Something like the 21st century 10 commandments  Then we can start taking the job of reshaping the world and it's values as seriously as we thought we were in the past few hundred years (where in fact we were tricked into giving all the responsibilities away to someone else, while we could be the cogs in the machine to have the "easy" life, how foolish we all have been)

it's true that being able to move somewhere that has rules that you like better is a good thing. That's why we have 50 states and not one state. It's called sovereignty. It's also why a one world government is a bad idea.  But still a pure democracy is a tyranny of the majority. The point of a republic is to protect the rights of minorities. The most minor of all is the individual himself. The majority should not even be allowed to vote out the rights of an individual.  And as I said the most basic right of all is the right to ones own body. One of the purposes of the Federal part of the government is to protect those rights. If a state is violating them then it should be stepping in. Any state that claims some rule or law over your own body is in effect declaring ownership of your body and it's an egregious offense. The federal government should be stopping that. Instead we are seeing the opposite. some of the states are trying to allow things and the federal government is stepping in and trying to overpower them and destroy those rights (such as marijuana legalization)

"well, you can't have freedom without responsibilities, and some members of society just don't take their responsibilities seriously enough, so..."

The way it's possible is the same way it's always been possible: clever politicians can twist just about every situation into something that justifys controls to keep everyone "free". The answer? Get rid of the middlemen politicians.

We can build the framework the state provides using computer systems. We've already proven that the most fundamental part of the state monopoly can be done better without the state, and that the state cannot easily prevent us from doing it. We just need to take back control of everything else they administer with any other technological means.

And once the balance of power has changed towards the people again, we can get rid of the political class forever, by giving everyone the right to vote on the rules we live by. And if you don't like how people make rules in your area, move to where they're doing things the way you do like. That's real democracy. That's real "rule by the people".

The most basic freedom of all is the right to own ones own body. If you own your own body... then you can decide what you eat for dinner. Society can't suddenly come in and say... "hmmm we had a vote and we don't think you should eat that hamburger for dinner, here eat this carrot instead" . If we own our own body then society can't come in and say... "hmm you don't absolutely need that second kidney. We are going to come in and take it without your permission so that we can save the life of someone else"

. So how is it that society thinks it is constitutional for them to "vote" what we can do with our own bodies? For instance.....  prostitution.