Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [law-discuss] NO Re: [ed44] Free?

Expand Messages
  • Daniel Quackenbush
    I think you re right Ed. I think we should have both freedom and liberty. One might say that liberty protects freedom. Without liberty, we have no freedom.
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 25, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I think you're right Ed.  I think we should have both freedom and liberty.  One might say that liberty "protects" freedom.  Without liberty, we have no freedom.  But we can have (some) freedom without liberty, so long as we can evade the authorities.  Without just laws, other people do not have the liberty that makes them free.  Forget I said anything--I just confused myself, because I might be using semantics rather than logic, LOL.

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Ed
      Sent: Aug 25, 2004 2:50 PM
      To: law-discuss@yahoogroups.com, ed44@yahoogroups.com
      Cc: PeopleBeforeLawyers@yahoogroups.com, "Pro-Se@..." , Legal Tips & Tricks , Legal_Self_Representation@yahoogroups.com, JAIL-SoundOff@yahoogroups.com, JAIL-Legal-Discussions@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [law-discuss] NO Re: [ed44] Free?

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: D
      Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 4:31 PM
      Subject: [ed44] Free?

      Are you free?

      Free. Not subject to legal constraint of another. (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition)

      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      No. Not if you choose to live with other people. That is the nature of life. To be free you must choose to live alone. Even there you will find other constraints of nature upon your freedom.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.