|
Disagree with the notion that the only personal freedoms liberals support are those you find personally distasteful. "Blue laws" and other restrictions to commercial activity on days some religions consider sacred have been limited or even removed by liberal / progressive legal interpretation of a citizens right to happiness versus the society’s desire to control personal behavior.
Judicial and public policy doctrines of "greater good" limit citizens, as well as governments, absolute control over anything - much less property rights. That doctrine isn’t ideologically liberal or conservative. It is policy developed over many years through the necessity of governing. It is subject to interpretation and use that is ideological, though. Sometimes business interests use eminent domain to pursue commercial interests like city development or business parks. Sometimes environmental groups use the same doctrine to protect federal lands and resources.
Don't see a lot of liberals marching around demanding more limits on economic freedom and opposing "contract with others and exchange goods and services without government interference". What is an example of liberally controlled government interference with exchanging goods and services?
I did mention rights (after behavior) Chris, and even rights, as you point out, are controlled. No right is absolute in our culture or society. JMPO that gun based violence is reduced in those countries. Canada is another example. Switzerland has a small homogenous and old (pre gun history) culture without a long history of personal gun use to reinforce that sense of security you describe. Unlike the USA – where history and culture celebrates gun use. I just disagree that regulating gun ownership automatically results in the loss of ones right to own a gun. Or that there is some liberal conspiracy to take guns away from people.
__________________
Scott
|