The land of the free. Fact or meaningless rhetoric?

[Greatest I am]

The land of the free. Fact or meaningless rhetoric?

Rhetoric is described as language that is not honest,sincere, or meaningful.

I am French. French has no word that equates to freedom or freewill as understood by the English. This makes freedom and land of the free purerhetorical statements and basically a dishonest statement. These terms are ideasor a reality that are impossible to have.

Freedom and free will then just becomes something that Iwould name as liberty. Liberty is described as permission especially to gofreely within specified limits. That says to me that we are only free to followthe rules of society and those in power.

That being the case, is land of the free a true andmeaningful expression?

Would it be more accurate to say land of liberty to followthe rules?

Free will is defined as freedom of humans to make choicesthat are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention.

Free will translates to being your own master and not havingyour will hampered by any outside influence not of your choosing.

Does any law or divine command negate free will, freedom ofchoice and the notion of a ---- Land of the free?

Regards
DL

 

[Stone]

The land of the free. Fact or meaningless rhetoric?

I see you are still looking for absolutes.

Does any law or divine command negate free will, freedom ofchoice.....

The freedom to mentally choose is there, the freedom to physically act upon those thoughts are obviously influenced by concepts of morality, ethics and of course, written law.
Freewill exists even when physical actions are restrained.

What, get tired of posting sophistry in the religion forum?

and the notion of a ---- Land of the free?

It's political and makes us feel unique and important.....sure, some puffing. meh.



Ironic.......Your idea that people should not follow a particular religion, but your own..... seems an an argument for denying freewill.
'We can think what ever we want so long as we agree with you'.

 

[CityGirl]

The land of the free. Fact or meaningless rhetoric?

40000 new laws went into effect at the first of this year. Land of the free?????

 

[Stone]

The land of the free. Fact or meaningless rhetoric?

40000 new laws went into effect at the first of this year. Land of the free?????

Democrats

 

[Greatest I am]

The land of the free. Fact or meaningless rhetoric?

40000 new laws went into effect at the first of this year. Land of the free?????

No argument from me.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Democrats

In an oligarchy, the rich own whoever is in power.

Regards
DL

 

[Stone]

In an oligarchy, the rich own whoever is in power.

Regards
DL

Then how do you rationalize supporting Obama?

 

[Greatest I am]

Then how do you rationalize supporting Obama?

I am not an American voter but when all politicians are owned, you still vote for the one you think is best.
If you look at the voting stats, you will note that many think that it makes very little difference.

Regards
DL

 

[Stone]

I am not an American voter but when all politicians are owned, you still vote for the one you think is best.
If you look at the voting stats, you will note that many think that it makes very little difference.

Regards
DL

If you look at the voting stats, you will note that many think that it makes very little difference.

That I agree with.

.....you still vote for the one you think is best.

While that's actually logical, restated "you still vote for the one you think is least worst " gives an entirely different image of those that govern.
IMO.....that's where we're at in the US with many elected officials.

 

[Jackass master]

The lesser of two evils is still evil. That is the choice we have. The land of the free means we still have the ability to choose a lot of things that direct our lives. Not as many as we should but better than a lot of folks face.

 

[Accountable]

I am French. French has no word that equates to freedom or freewill as understood by the English. This makes freedom and land of the free purerhetorical statements and basically a dishonest statement. These terms are ideasor a reality that are impossible to have.

That's got to be in the top 5 of the most arrogant statements I've ever read. Whether the French had an idea and thought to come up with a word for it are the only criteria for defining if a statement is true?? Ha Ha Ha! I fart in your general direction!

Rhetoric is described as language that is not honest,sincere, or meaningful.

But it is defined:

noun1. (in writing or speech) the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast.

2. the art or science of all specialized literary uses of language in prose or verse, including the figures of speech.

3. the study of the effective use of language.

4. the ability to use language effectively.

5. the art of prose in general as opposed to verse.

Freedom and free will then just becomes something that Iwould name as liberty.

Why would your personal definition of one word force an unrelated word to mean something, nothing, or anything at all?? It's been a long time since I took my one class in logic, but I do believe that's called a Doesn't Follow fallacy.

Liberty is described as permission especially to gofreely within specified limits. That says to me that we are only free to followthe rules of society and those in power.

But it is defined:

noun, plural lib·er·ties. 1. freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.

2. freedom from external or foreign rule; independence.

3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.

4. freedom from captivity, confinement, or physical restraint: The prisoner soon regained his liberty.

5. permission granted to a sailor, especially in the navy, to go ashore.

The rest of your gobbledegook will have to pass to another reader.

Is "Land of the Free" fact? No, it's a slogan, an idea. It used to be a goal. As a rhetorical device, it's pure genius, evidenced by the results it has produced. I'm not sure it was ever a completely accurate description of the USA, but it is a worthy goal - one that I would support pursuing again.

 

[Greatest I am]

The lesser of two evils is still evil. That is the choice we have. The land of the free means we still have the ability to choose a lot of things that direct our lives. Not as many as we should but better than a lot of folks face.

No argument as you are describing your liberty and not your freedom.

No one except the top dog is free in our oligarchies.
We are all slaves to our rich masters.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Is "Land of the Free" fact? No, it's a slogan, an idea. It used to be a goal. As a rhetorical device, it's pure genius, evidenced by the results it has produced. I'm not sure it was ever a completely accurate description of the USA, but it is a worthy goal - one that I would support pursuing again.

We agree on this. That is the main purpose of the O P even if you do not like how I phrased it.

Unfortunately, most Americans will not pursue it as they live under the delusion that they have it.

If no one knocks, the doors will not open.

Enjoy your liberty. You have no freedom in your oligarchy.

Regards
DL

 

[Accountable]

We agree on this. That is the main purpose of the O P even if you do not like how I phrased it.

Okay then. :thumbup

 

[Stone]

We agree on this. That is the main purpose of the O P even if you do not like how I phrased it.

Unfortunately, most Americans will not pursue it as they live under the delusion that they have it.

If no one knocks, the doors will not open.

Enjoy your liberty. You have no freedom in your oligarchy.

Regards
DL

That is the main purpose of the O P even if you do not like how I phrased it.

Bullshit.......you posted a debate based upon deriving an absolute conclusion and now you claim your intentions were otherwise?
That's outright disingenuous.

And you seem to do it often.

 

[Stone]

No argument as you are describing your liberty and not your freedom.

No one except the top dog is free in our oligarchies.
We are all slaves to our rich masters.

Regards
DL

We are all slaves to our rich masters.

Vociferous rhetoric or a call to revolution?

You obviously didn't originally relocate to North America to enjoy our political systems ( )......perhaps our materialism?

 

[Greatest I am]

Vociferous rhetoric or a call to revolution?

You obviously didn't originally relocate to North America to enjoy our political systems ( )......perhaps our materialism?

A call for people to think.

Regards
DL

 

[Stone]

A call for people to think.

Regards
DL

You'd do better in the future by being more open and not given to absolutes and rash statements.



If you need to be bold, consider being logical at the same time.
Starting with sophistry and absolutes is not conducive to a constructive dialog

 

[Panacea]

Polarizing statements are a call for people to react, not think. They're sometimes tempting, especially when you perceive an injustice, but they're ultimately bad for the cause.

 

[Greatest I am]

Polarizing statements are a call for people to react, not think. They're sometimes tempting, especially when you perceive an injustice, but they're ultimately bad for the cause.

One cannot react without first thinking of reacting.
The mind controls our reactions. Reactions do not control the mind.

Regards
DL