Does freedom have a meaning?
FD,
What meaning does 'freedom' have, in a society where law courts commonly refuse to remove those convicted of criminal acts, from society ? [.....or, e.g. where people guilty of
negligent manslaughter walk free, or can 'suffer' 2-3 years of goal time -
for effectively taking a life.]
In such a society, does 'freedom' then mean that anyone/everyone is free to do whatever they like ?
Another Q...
If generally law abiding citizens are forced to live among criminals, .....If criminals are allowed to live among law abiding citizens, do the law abiding citizens also enjoy 'freedom' ?
FD,
If 'freedom' is [
effectively] a licence from all lawful restraint, what is the quality of such 'freedom' ?
+++
I think what i am trying to say is;
Wouldn't a society have a higher quality of living [and internal safety], if standards of justice and law and 'righteousness' among its citizenry were emphasised [and taught!], rather than an emphasis on the rights of citizens to enjoy their 'freedom' [i.e. a 'licence' to effectively, act as they wish, without consequences] ?
Doesn't the word freedom [and its 'sibling' word, liberty],
traditionally imply a positive quality ???
In a society like Australia, where has that quality', of enjoying freedom, gone to ?
And why has it 'gone' ?
IMO, if societal standards [of truth, and law, and justice] are low, then a consequence of that, will be that the quality of the [real] 'freedoms' of citizens within that society will also be low.
IMO, we [Western societies]
are suffering from the loss of [moral] values and [moral] standards, a loss, which we have whole heartedly embraced as a supposed 'positive' !