Do you believe in liberty and personal freedom? Of course you

>>1685888
>Do you believe in liberty and personal freedom?
No, they're human inventions, existing only due to current morality and tradition.

>>1685888
>Do you believe in liberty and personal freedom?
No, unrestrained freedom leads to misery and sadness.

People will almost always choose order and security over freedom when given the option.

>>1685898
>American revolution et al.
Uh

File: download.png (7KB, 512x120px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 512x120px

>>1685888
>Do you believe in liberty and personal freedom? Of course you do! Here's a couple of questions for you:
ok

>Should a person be free to consent to chattel slavery?
>chattel slavery
>physical chains enslavement, humans as property
i believe it exists, ur birth certificate being point to the contra, the police -OR ANYONE FOR THAT MATTER IN REFERENCE TO AD BACULUM- to the latter.
ad baculum has been the ruling force on this planet, this existence, ad baculum
>baculum
>baculum
>ˈbakjʊləm/
>noun
>noun: baculum; plural noun: bacula
>another term for os penis.
>Origin
>1930s: modern Latin.
>Translate baculum to
>Use over time for: baculum
>Show less
>os penis
>nounZOOLOGY
>noun: os penis; plural noun: os penises
>a bone in the penis of carnivores and some other mammals.
consent to slavery is indentured servitude and holds for as long as contract formation holds, again, can be broken/meaningless by ad baculum

>If he does, is he still free since he consented?
all men are free at all times the rest is likelyhood probability of cause & effect
t. thermodynamics

>>1685911
Proves my point. The colonies chose to unify under a strong federal government rather than exist as a confederation of states.

>>1685898
>People
you could easily argue that by that stage 'people' transition from the caste of citizen to slave

>>1685891
>they're human inventins
>therefore they don't exist
Undergrad logic

>>1685930
The point is that whatever we deem 'liberty' and 'freedom' to be is fluid and at the mercy of modern morals.

They're not 'laws of the universe' which exist everywhere and at every time.

Read a fucking book.

>>1685932
Don't cop an attitude with me coz I will fucking wreck you. So what if freedom isn't a "law of the universe?" I'm not aware of anyone that even makes that argument. I'm pretty sure most contemporary political theorists would acknowledge that liberty and freedom are civil constructs that are supported by the authority of the state. So when someone asks if you "believe" in liberty and personal freedom, and you say "no," that doesn't make any sense, because they're existing concepts. You can't argue something out of existence. You would never say you don't believe in telephones because "they're human inventions."

>>1685888
>Do you believe in liberty and personal freedom?
Yes.

>Should a person be free to consent to chattel slavery?
No.

>>1685888
A person is not free to take the life of another or take the life of himself

since I assume that Life and Liberty is of the same value so too should those rules be the same.