Asana, everyone can see the point you are making, but your conclusion that safety is equivalent to freedom is downright false.
If everyone is free, we run the risk of having our freedoms infringed by tyrants. In order to prevent this, we generally renege some of our freedoms in order to protect some of our more valued freedoms. We are willing to give up the freedom to murder and steal, for instance, in exchange for preventing others from murdering and stealing--which could harm us or deprive us of freedom.
However, this does not mean that safety is more valuable than freedom, or equal to it. I would never trade my freedom of speech, for instance, even though this freedom could potentially lead me to anger someone who subsequently hurts me. The potential safety gained is not worth the freedom lost, whereas I am willing to give up my freedom to go about murdering people because I do not value this and I would not want others to murder me.
In an imperfect world, the best way to maximize freedom is to restrict it a little bit. But too much restriction defeats the purpose, and too little can lead to potential abuses of this power.
Tweet This Topic
