Freedom of choice

[mayxanh]

American society in modern time promotes freedom of choice. This means people must feel free to do whatever they want to do regardless of traditional morality values, provided that they do no harm to the society.

However, this is not always true. A big example, cathothics who want to remain virgin / chaste should prepare to face all kinds of persecutions from the peers and society

Today, people are not discrimated / prejudiced because of loosing virginity (like the old days) but because of **being virgin / chaste **

In summary, freedom of choice is not a real freedom of choice. In fact, it is rather a reverse of genuine morality

Do you agree???

 

[Christy_Beth]

Well, it is sort of counter to current culture. I, myself, have chosen to be chaste. I divorced in 1987, and have been chaste since. I’m not comfortable with the idea that I should go out and “be with” a man. I’ve even been told that it would improve my attitude. Forgive me, but I am not attracted to that sort of stuff. Call me whatever you want, just don’t call me stupid.

 

[Maxirad]

I remember reading that freedom of choice is impossible without freedom of life.

 

[FriendlyFace]

28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind and to things that should not be done. 29 They were filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters,[f] insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, rebellious toward parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 They know God’s decree, that those who practice such things deserve to die—yet they not only do them but even applaud others who practice them. (Romans 1:28-32)

 

[Bravo_6]

Freedom in itself is not an “absolute” or an “absolute value”;it implies limitations and conditions.The “Universal Declaration Of Human Rights” was originally written up as "Natural Rights,"but “THEY” needed to remove any reference to God so based every chief article in it,from the philosophy of Immanuel Kant(huminism):read ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ by Geoffrey Robertson to explain its origins and how the first draft of document was originally in view of the protection for Christians from the Turks in Bulgariaamong other locations.The perversion,the hypocrisy,lunacy and everything in-between.Good read.

 

[janela]

people must feel free to do whatever they want to do regardless of traditional morality values, provided that they do no harm to the society.
… How is it possible to ignore traditional values or morals without harming the society ?
In summary, freedom of choice is not a real freedom of choice. In fact, it is rather a reverse of genuine morality … Do you agree???

/QUOTE]

“Freedom of choice” is one those clichés which sounds good in theory but in fact, is a trap, because as u said, people think they can do what they want.
When people take advantage of “freedom of choice” they either trample on the rights and feelings of others, or they become slaves to their own whims and fancies. (eg. a person who constantly eats too much becomes overweight, unhealthy and even greedy because they eat more than is necessary for them).

I think that freedom implies responsibility. If we are free to make a choice, then consequently, we are responsible for the consequences. Unfortunately, most people think precisely the opposite: they think freedom relieves them of responsibility !!! (But a person who acts without freedom of choice - such as a prisoner - is less responsible.)

True freedom is in our hearts,. True freedom is not about doing what we want, how we want, when we want and with whom we want!! True freedom, I think, means to be free of fear and guilt, free of confusion and anxiety, free of regret (for careless actiosns committed!!). It’s about recognising what is good for others and for ourselves. (for example, if I have children, it’s not a good idea for me to practice high-risk sports!!)
ciao

 

[LegoGE1947]

mayxanh;10561568:

people must feel free to do whatever they want to do regardless of traditional morality values, provided that they do no harm to the society.
…

       How is it possible to ignore traditional values or morals without harming the society ?

In summary, freedom of choice is not a real freedom of choice. In fact, it is rather a reverse of genuine morality … Do you agree???

/QUOTE]

“Freedom of choice” is one those clichés which sounds good in theory but in fact, is a trap, because as u said, people think they can do what they want.
When people take advantage of “freedom of choice” they either trample on the rights and feelings of others, or they become slaves to their own whims and fancies. (eg. a person who constantly eats too much becomes overweight, unhealthy and even greedy because they eat more than is necessary for them).

I think that freedom implies responsibility. If we are free to make a choice, then consequently, we are responsible for the consequences. Unfortunately, most people think precisely the opposite: they think freedom relieves them of responsibility !!! (But a person who acts without freedom of choice - such as a prisoner - is less responsible.)

True freedom is in our hearts,. True freedom is not about doing what we want, how we want, when we want and with whom we want!! True freedom, I think, means to be free of fear and guilt, free of confusion and anxiety, free of regret (for careless actiosns committed!!). It’s about recognising what is good for others and for ourselves. (for example, if I have children, it’s not a good idea for me to practice high-risk sports!!)
ciaoAre we free to go out in the parking lot and flatten people’s tires because it feels good?

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Freedom in itself is not an “absolute” or an “absolute value”;it implies limitations and conditions.The “Universal Declaration Of Human Rights” was originally written up as "Natural Rights,"but “THEY” needed to remove any reference to God so based every chief article in it**,from the philosophy of Immanuel Kant(huminism)**:read ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ by Geoffrey Robertson to explain its origins and how the first draft of document was originally in view of the protection for Christians from the Turks in Bulgariaamong other locations.The perversion,the hypocrisy,lunacy and everything in-between.Good read.

Um… I don’t think the philosophy of Immanuel Kant had anything to do with the positive rights set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights anymore than the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche did. Which is to say, not at all.

How do you figure?

 

[Kamaduck]

American society in modern time promotes freedom of choice. This means people must feel free to do whatever they want to do regardless of traditional morality values, provided that they do no harm to the society.

However, this is not always true. A big example, cathothics who want to remain virgin / chaste should prepare to face all kinds of persecutions from the peers and society

Today, people are not discrimated / prejudiced because of loosing virginity (like the old days) but because of **being virgin / chaste **

In summary, freedom of choice is not a real freedom of choice. In fact, it is rather a reverse of genuine morality

Do you agree???

I always figured that the freedom to make your own descisions was more of a legal thing. It has nothing to do with societal norms. Essentially, nobody can force you to have sex. That doesn’t mean they can’t mock you mercilessly. They are also free to make that choice.

 

[janela]

@ LEGO GE1947
“Are we free to go out in the parking lot and flatten people’s tires because it feels good?”

Note… I did not say “what FEELS good, but what IS good.” Naturally I mean morally, ethically… Was that so difficult ??

 

[LegoGE1947]

@ LEGO GE1947
“Are we free to go out in the parking lot and flatten people’s tires because it feels good?”

Note… I did not say “what FEELS good, but what IS good.” Naturally I mean morally, ethically… Was that so difficult ??

Flattening people’s tires is not good and to me it wouldn’t even FEEL good. Although it might to some people! I have a son-in-law who had a buddy who worked in a tire repair shop and this “buddy” loosened the lug nuts on one of son-in-laws tires “as a joke” Unfortunately when my son-in-law found out about it he was NOT amused, he reported it to the guy’s boss and the guy was out in the street.