Political, economic, and freedom values

In order to not make this an acrimonius debate of parties just limit your responses to what kind of political-legal-economic society you would want to live in with the proviso that the society must be survivable in the real world.

To start off without specifics I will state my values as 0 for no value in an attribute and 10 in value for the most protected attribute. Note that this is an ideal that does not exist now.
The amount of government interference I would like to see dedicated to the following values-

Personal Security: 2
Personal freedom: 1
Economic opportunity: 2
Retirement: 2
Criminal Justice: 6
Employment: 1
Border Security: 9
Education: 2
Protection of Corporate entities: 0
Personal property: 2
Civil Law: 2
Protection of citizens: 7
Decedent's estates: 1
Income tax: 0
Transaction tax: 1
International trade fees: 2
Intelligence: 7
Military: 4
Freedom to enter country: 9
Freedom to leave country: 1
Publication: 1
Communication: 1
Religion: 3
Secrecy: 2
________________________________
Personal freedoms permitted:
Intellectual: 9
Purchases: 7
Property fief: 9
Travel on public areas: 7
Association: 7
Publication: 9
Education: 9
Personal property: 8
Transaction: 7
Personal Security: 9
Interference with others: 2
Property protection: 8
Disposal of public property: 2
Religion: 4

freedoms

yo thats real nice to here chb you the man and uh speaking ofDa man as my attorney recently said"this will of course only effect your personalliberty's your right to probably cuase any need for warrent to search and sieze you know your 4th ammendment which pretty much non existent with the homeland security laws anyway so you arent lossing much."
This is out of context however i did in fact do a search on and read the New REAL DEAL homeland security law check em out... oh do it early in the day if you belief in our constitution know

anything about the inherent evils of government or human natureyou may have trouble sleeping get back to me when youre finished w that then maybe ill ruminate what ifs wit ya

So you want to discuss search and seizure laws, eh?
Under Clinton arkansas had the presigned by the municipal judges search and arrest orders needing only the attachment of an affidavit and fill in the blanks of such minor details as defendant's name and address. Believe me the rule is much stricter now than when Clinton was governor.
I have read the actual Homeland Security laws 7 months ago. It took 8 days. There have been additions since which I have not read. I believe some will be found unconstitutional but most will meet constitutional scrutiny. Let your lawyer explain what I mean by this as I am sure he is your source for any legal misconceptions. I practised law for 12 years as both a deputy prosecutor and criminal defense attorney. So I doubt you have much to teach me in the way of the 4th amendment, 5th amendment, or even a denno hearing.

That's an interesting list. What would you say the actual values are closer to right now?

I will reserve that opinion after others have made their considerations known.

CHB its good you feel so highly about what we as americans stand for. The main core factors. I am in no way knocking you or anyone's posts. I am curious to see what you have in mind to get a point out or question some resolve with this post, please enlighten me so that I may understand thing better from your point of view.
What is the main focus with this?
what values are core to you?
Are there any freedoms that you feel are in Jeapordy that have not already been slowly dwindled away from the constitution?
and final question, Is religion a main factor of war or peace?

just curious to your responses so that I may understand. I will not judge you or anyone I simply believe that all knowledge or really intelligent aspect of any discover begin with questions.

What is the main focus with this?

Click to expand...

Basically to see what others actually think are values that they would risk something of real importance to protect.

what values are core to you?

Click to expand...

The freedom to think, which from my first post, should be obvious.

Are there any freedoms that you feel are in Jeapordy that have not already been slowly dwindled away from the constitution?

Click to expand...

Most freedoms that we had under the original conception of the constitution have been restricted, redefined, or eliminated. In my mind, what we have left are not so restricted to be considered trivial compared to what can still happen.

and final question, Is religion a main factor of war or peace?

Click to expand...

In the United States religion has come down on both sides but basically as cheerleaders rather than warriors. The Civil War was the closest thing we have had to a religious war.
In most other countries religion has been the main impetus of war in most of their histories.
In the future I believe a certain religion will make war inevitable if we wish to retain our intellectual freedom.


What I fear is that thinking really is not valued by most americans, just observe the number of postulates that are based on slogans, academic BS, and political correctness made by many of the members of this board and even moreso by other boards.

Most of what you say i gree with to some extent. It doesnt mean you are incorrect but there is always a basis for understanding of what you speak.

I agree with the consitiution and our liberties are being slowly chipped away for what? security, protection, or even to make so-called laws better?
I believe we all have the power to change what has become our goverment and our way of life, however we continue to live like cattle and be herded in the direction they want us to go with no question.

Those that do stand up are labeled as traitors or heretics and quickly overun by politics or judged and everyone take turns pointing thier fingers and laughing.

Its sad, I agree, i see it everday, and to think this is the future we leave our children, what can they do with what we have destroyed?
As for war in religiom, I dont agree but i guess i am allowed to, the fact of the civil war over religion is somewhat biased in MY OPINION.
Its not that you are not correct, however, i feel as if it was about POWER and ECONOMY, not religion in any way.

as for our wars overseas, yes it will be inevitable and eventually we all will be fighting a Holy war, its in Genesis.

I like to see that you can express issues without the hard feeling of name-calling and allowing others to express themselves..this is the kind of conversations that people will follow and learn from, when they feel degraded for thier beliefs or feel they are trying to be changed by someones opinion then thats where we all lose.

I believe we can be one voice and stand strong for what we believe..I live my life with this" there is nothing in this world of value without sacrifice" Sun TZU

Thanks for the post bro, i enjoyed reading it.

As for war in religiom, I dont agree but i guess i am allowed to, the fact of the civil war over religion is somewhat biased in MY OPINION.

Click to expand...

Actually I was addressing your particular articulation of your question. I said the Civil War was the closest thing we have had to a religious war. and limited it to that.
We have not had a war of religion as yet. We have had battles, both figurative, and real.
Orgin of Rhode Island...and the massacre of arkansans immigrating to california by the mormons.

I believe the Civil War should not have happened. The states were considered sovereign, even by northern states. Only in the last 3 years before the war did the concept of union become a battle cry, but without legal foundation.
Slavery and the abolitionists had little to do with the actual fighting but much with the post war propaganda.
The resentment of the South with the tariffs were by far the overwhelming reason for the intellectual and economic leaders of the south fomenting the seperation.
OTOH without the churches of the north supporting the war, the war would not have happened beyond a few face saving incidents. Most citizens of the north as well as the south did not want a war, as opposed to the economic leaders of the north who saw their markets eroding, and the political leaders who saw their personal power being jeopardised as the states went their own ways. The churches were the main means of drumming up a movement in favor of war.