Anybody Here Know What It Means to Confuse "Liberty" with "License?"

I will hazard a guess that there are a lot of responses like:

"Huh?"

We all have liberty to kill, but only james bond has license.

We all have liberty to kill, but only james bond has license.


Actually, James Bond has LICENCE...

We have the liberty to pursue good not the license to do whatever the hell we please. This is where the so-called "right to privacy" becomes an issue. We don't want a government e.g. that knocks down the door of unmarried folks in an hotel room but at the same time, we don't condone sadistic or masochistic behavior between adults because it's "private".

We don't want a government e.g. that knocks down the door of unmarried folks in an hotel room but at the same time, we don't condone sadistic or masochistic behavior between adults because it's "private".
If they're consenting adults, why does it matter how they gets their rocks off? Whole businesses revolve around S&M people.

What if the consent takes on severe bodily harm even the possibility of death and hospital records record the damage and the reasons even though the patient says all was consensual? Nothing should be done? If the approach is to keep the 2 apart or "educate" the one who's been hurt, isn't society making a decision that their consensual behavior should be stopped? Why if the only foundation of what is permissable is consent.

We have the liberty to pursue good not the license to do whatever the hell we please.

no, it has nothing to do with doing good. license is unfettered. liberty is ruled by law. that's the only difference.

I can kill, but only in self defense. james bond can kill anybody he pleases.

nothing about the terms license and liberty says anything at all about what SORT of restriction the rule of law places on you. its just that liberty is constrained by the rule of law, and license is unfettered.

if the right to privacy were a license, it would mean i could do ANYTHING at all i wanted in private: kill my spouse, manufacture drugs, whatever.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and speculate that not too many kids in public high schools are exposed to study of natural law and the social contract nowadays . . . for that matter, I'd wager most college kids haven't a clue, either

I'm gonna go out on a limb and speculate that not too many kids in public high schools are exposed to study of natural law and the social contract nowadays . . . for that matter, I'd wager most college kids haven't a clue, either


they arent taught the phlogiston theory of combustion, either. a travesty.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and speculate that not too many kids in public high schools are exposed to study of natural law and the social contract nowadays . . . for that matter, I'd wager most college kids haven't a clue, either


I am not sure what is being taught in schools these days because whenever someone asks people on the street either current events (name current VP, location of Afganastan) or American History (number of stars on the US flag, the number of world wars, etc) they don't have a clue and some of their answers are down right embarrassing.

nothing about the terms license and liberty says anything at all about what SORT of restriction the rule of law places on you. its just that liberty is constrained by the rule of law, and license is unfettered.

First prize of a Walther PPK handgun to bix.

For extra credit, can anyone guess why this thread was started?

For extra credit, can anyone guess why this thread was started?
In tribute to John Locke, who foretold how snarky posters would become if GSS established an unmoderated political thread :D

In tribute to John Locke, who foretold how snarky posters would become if GSS established an unmoderated political thread :D

Bully for you!!

An uncanny grasp of the painfully obvious!!

they arent taught the phlogiston theory of combustion, either. a travesty.

I always knew that phlogiston stuff was just full of hot air.