Posted on 03/26/2004 6:52:42 AM PST by Frapster
Freedom is not a Luxury
Freedom is a divine gift that accompanies our salvation. That freedom, however, does not necessarily relate to political, social, economic, and other external freedoms. It is a condition of the heart rather than a state of external being.
There are external freedoms that are an essential part of our democracy that should be cherished and adhered to by all. The enjoyment of those freedoms, though, has inevitably limitations. I remember a college professor at one of the colleges I attended saying, "My freedom ends where your nose begins."
There is a price associated with our freedom that has cost many their lives to procure and of still more to assure. The blight on that freedom is when one's freedom is seen as the right to do as he chooses in every situation and at all times. Instead of freedom, that becomes license wherein the rights and rules of freedom are chatteled off for thoughtless, frivolous, or riotous living. In such cases the rights of some (or the many) are limited or eliminated to the favor of a preferential few.
There are some issues of license that destroy the well-being of all. We would like to see power groups, whose freedom is arbitrarily imposed over others, act in self-restraint but that is not likely to happen. People who have gained the foothold of domination are not likely to concede any portion of their liberties to those whom they see as the lesser or weaker beings.
Where the product of one group's power becomes destructive to the well-being of a society at large, in order for that society to remain free these groups must be held accountable for what they superimpose on the national welfare. Such demands, however, have a tendency to place us all at risk simply for the fact that all of us have freedoms that we feel to be our rights. We feel that they, therefore, must be right for all when indeed not all desire the agendas of the freedom that we demand.
Although the state of affairs may bring us to the place that government and courts must intervene, they are not the final answer to the needs of a society and should serve only a limited purpose.
The Declaration of Independence states that "all government is by the consent of the governed." If a society wants to be free, it must be self-governed meaning that it should police itself instead of relying on the force of government. Don't take me wrong. I am NOT advocating mob rule, vigilante action, or the rise of civil militia groups. These are never the answer. They, in fact, are destructive to the things we hold most dear, ultimately leading to anarchy.
In a free society, options must be made available as regulated by public discourse. In order for me to be free to express myself, I must grant that same freedom to others who disagree with me. If I don't have the ability to properly express myself on the grounds of a discourse that convinces others of my opinion, then I must concede to others who are more convincing, more appealing, and/or appear to have more to offer.
Obviously, that opens a Pandora's Box that most of us don't want to address. It is so much easier when one has the advantage of societal approval and a majority status to flow with the tide and accept the status quo as his due. When that isn't so, he faces a majority disapproval, disregard, or opposition. Any of these constitutes a reduction of his social freedom.
So freedom, to be permanent and unshakeable, must depend on the unity of the society in which it exists. Unity inevitably centers on deep held convictions that cause people to adhere together; working together, and if need to be, fighting together against what it is that threatens that society. This does not mean that all will believe precisely the same things. It means that there must be a platform of beliefs on which the bulk of that society stands and will not fall through or go beyond. This is the platform of shared beliefs.
Beliefs produce standards and standards, in turn, produce private behavior and public policy. One cannot separate the fundamentals of his character from his ultimate behavior and choices; neither can a society separate such issues from its combined public behavior. Therefore the moral and spiritual character of a proposed leader is of utmost importance.
I remember listening to a presidential candidate many years ago and subsequently having the Lord show me the following scriptural statement: "Though their mouth is smoother than butter, enmity is in their hearts; their words more soothing than oil, yet sharpened like swords" (Psalms 55:21 NJB). In this time when political rhetoric waxes loud, long, and strong, we must be careful to look beyond political statements and public posturing to the heart of those who run for office.
A society must be careful that it chooses a leader who will foster the greater beliefs of that society, who will not violate its trust in either his private or public moments, and who will never violate the tenets of a God-given conscience regardless of what he perceives the cost to be. Jeff
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.