It's the only thing that makes sense, only free men can have a free nation, and it must be an act of our own free will to be a part of it, or no liberty ever really exists.
Actually "freedom" is not an unhindered right to perpetrate your will upon another.
Rather it is the the absence of true bondage as in prison walls, chains and having judgement against yourself. Freedom is not without restraint, but freedom it's self requires a certain amount of control to preserve it.
Thanks for the instruction, but no, I don't need to be on my guard about how I use language. Been doing it for a living for a while now. And, anyone would have assumed you were talking about their article, since that's what you were commenting on. Thanks for playing. Have a great day. And no sword and shield. If I'm mad, you'll know it.
Even the greatest writers have editors and critics (persons who judges the merits of literary, artistic, or musical works, especially ones who do so professionally)...
In response to the original terminology of "free will" as correctly used by you in that an action must not be forced...
But in other context where regulation is seen as a method to steal one's freedom, as in "you have the right to express your free will" which is being promoted on a grand scale today. One should clarify the distinction between the two and that Sir is all I tried to do...
It's the only thing that makes sense, only free men can have a free nation, and it must be an act of our own free will to be a part of it, or no liberty ever really exists.
Actually "freedom" is not an unhindered right to perpetrate your will upon another.
Rather it is the the absence of true bondage as in prison walls, chains and having judgement against yourself. Freedom is not without restraint, but freedom it's self requires a certain amount of control to preserve it.
Where the hell did I say freedom meant that? And true liberty must acknowledge other's right to person, liberty and property.
Please lower your shield and sheath your sword Mr Morris;
Nowhere did I refer to you saying anything, It was just a general comment.
We need to be on guard in how we use the term "Free Will" is all...
Thanks for the instruction, but no, I don't need to be on my guard about how I use language. Been doing it for a living for a while now. And, anyone would have assumed you were talking about their article, since that's what you were commenting on. Thanks for playing. Have a great day. And no sword and shield. If I'm mad, you'll know it.
Even the greatest writers have editors and critics (persons who judges the merits of literary, artistic, or musical works, especially ones who do so professionally)...
In response to the original terminology of "free will" as correctly used by you in that an action must not be forced...
But in other context where regulation is seen as a method to steal one's freedom, as in "you have the right to express your free will" which is being promoted on a grand scale today. One should clarify the distinction between the two and that Sir is all I tried to do...