Thursday, May 10, 2012
Govt restrictions & personal freedoms
May 10, 2012 There was a recent news item wherein a chef objected to the restriction that pate de Foie gras derived from force-fed geese and ducks should not be served in restaurants. The objection by this chef was that it imposed upon his personal freedom to serve his customers that which delighted them.
This was a clarion call for support from those who rebel against any government interference with their personal freedoms. There are several questions here: One question asks what personal freedoms are we so unwilling to yield. Namely, should we drive on either side of the road? Should we ignore traffic lights? Should we kill our neighbor or deface his property when he is sufficiently annoying? Should we spit on sidewalks? Should we take whatever we wish from an establishment without paying? Should we use our computers to hack into any account we wish to? These are but a few examples of our personal “freedoms” that have been restricted by government.
Another question asks, why we are so afraid of the government infringing on our personal freedoms. An answer to that question is crucial. What we fear is that the government can become tyrannical. But what do we mean by “tyrannical”? Is it tyrannical for the government to require us to drive strictly on the right side of the road? In England they drive on the left side. Is it tyrannical for the government to require us to stop at a red light? And why must we have drivers licenses anyway? Again,these are but a few of the examples of some questions we may ask about government tyranny.
Let us consider an essence of the restriction of personal freedoms. An early, and perhaps one of the most important, set of restrictions are the Ten Commandments. What was the thrust to those commandments? Were they designed to elevate us from savagery to civilized beings? This is an important consideration because if it is true then we must ask ourselves: have they been sufficient to make us civilized beings? Our human history tells us that they have not been sufficient. We have wars, pogroms, genocide, murder, thievery, torture, to name a few. Are we in need of additional commandments?
Now consider what functions a government should have. One function is that a government should make it possible for its citizenry to live in reasonable harmony. It should take in the spirit of the Ten Commandments and seek ways to reduce violations of that spirit. And so in the United States we drive on the right side of the road whereas in England they drive on the left side of the road. Either way, the convention allows for an orderly procession and reduces the risk of friction among the drivers. Similarly, a government restricts the freedom to murder; restricts the freedom to spit on sidewalks (a potential for the spread of disease), restricts the freedom to hack into other people’s accounts.
Another function a government perhaps should have is to lead us into being more humane, not only to other fellow citizens, not only to other human beings, but, perhaps, also to our fellow creatures – all our fellow inhabitants on this planet. Would that be in the spirit of the Ten Commandments? When a government encroaches on our personal freedoms perhaps we should ask ourselves, does this restriction elevate us to being more civilized, or does the restriction serve only to make it easier for the government to dominate us and aggrandize itself, its own families, friends, and supporters?
Albert's space 