A Sales Guy Don’t Confuse Like with Rights

Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.

Mark Suster and Fred Wilson wrote two powerful posts last week in defense of Gay Marriage and The Cordoba Mosque. They were eloquently written and heartfelt. At the core of both was the realization that it was just “right” to allow people to make decisions for themselves whether the rest of us like it or not.

It sadden me to read the comments. The number of people who openly opposed gay marriage and the development of the Mosque near ground zero was astonishing. The anger, venom, bitterness and desire to impose themselves on others was disheartening.

I think we are losing our grip on the definition of freedom. Freedom has nothing to do with liking. We have to stop confusing the two.

I don’t like the KKK, Skinheads, Rush Limbaugh, or the much of the crap that is put on TV today aimed at my kids. I don’t like flag burning or abortion. There are a lot of things people do, that I don’t like. With that in mind, I would fight to protect the rights of the KKK, Skinheads, Rush Limbaugh, the crap they put on TV, flag burning and aborrtion, not because I like them, but because I LOVE freedom.

You can’t expect to be free if you don’t allow others to be free. Freedom is reciprocal. Everyone gets it or no one gets it. Freedom is all encompassing. There is no such thing as partially free.

Too often we confuse liking something with providing the right to do something. But it doesn’t work that way. It actually works just the opposite. The founding fathers created rights to guarantee our freedom, to protect us from those who disliked what we did. They new that if we used LIKE to determine our freedoms we’d all be in trouble.

Take LIKE out of the freedom discussion and it makes things just a little easier. I don’t like a lot of things people do, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to do them.

Don’t confuse like with rights. It’ll cost you your freedom because somebody somewhere doesn’t like what you’re doing and that’s not reason enough to demand you stop. Our own freedom is tightly wrapped in how much freedom we give others and like should have nothing to do with it.

http://jerrykennedy.com/ Jerry Kennedy

Dude…you nailed it: we deny the freedom of others at the peril of our own. Thanks for writing this…I love it when you go out on a limb for your beliefs!
TC

I hear you BUT…I have to say that I struggle with the Ground Zero mosque and groups like KKK or similarly unreasonable toxic groups because they disrupt the sense of freedom I feel despite the fact I’m not really directly affected (at least that’s how I feel at this point). Some actions that people have the “right” to take ruin the freedom others would otherwise feel. I don’t think it’s quite as simple as taking my own personal preferences out of the equation or accepting the deduction of someone in the blogoshere. The “devil’s advocate” in me wonders if a guy like Fred Wilson is more interested in supporting Mayor Bloomberg and President Obama; I honestly don’t know but he states it emphatically. I will say however, the fact that he was standing at ground zero when the first plane hit and he lives in NYC, does give him significant more credibility than if he was writing from somewhere far less involved. I thought Mark Suster’s piece on gay marriage was very well stated and also made a better over all case than did Mr. Wilson’s. I also think the two issues are bit of an apples to oranges scenario (even though I recognize you can boil it down to a freedom and tolerance issue). For me it’s the location of the mosque vs affording gay couples the same rights as heterosexual couples. I’m not for religious oppression, I’d just like to see the mosque built farther/further(?) from ground zero. In my opinion, the potential for compromise exists with the mosque/Muslim community, not so with the gay community. Moving the the location of a place of worship is a far different discussion than arguing that gay couples don’t deserve the same right to have all legal rights entitled to heterosexual couples and to be legitimized in the eyes of everybody in the country; not to be treated as a second-class citizens.
http://asalesguy.com Keenan

All great points and absolutely valid. In the end we as a people have to ask ourselves how we define freedom.

This statement of yours is powerful: “Some actions that people have the “right” to take ruin the freedom others would otherwise feel.” and that is where the line needs to be drawn. As long as the KKK is not burning a cross on my front lawn, or isn’t preventing me from working from where I want to work, they have the right to exist and say what they want.

Allowing gays to marry or having the Mosque built near ground zero in no way affects my rights or the rights of others and isn”t ruining the freedom of others. And that is why they have a right to do them. Just because we don’t like something or like how it makes us feel, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have the freedom to do it.

Thanks for you comments tchorske, I really appreciate your honesty and openness.
http://asalesguy.com Keenan

Thanks Jerry,

Freedom is a political and socially mature concept . . . I think at times we are too juvenile to handle it.
TC

I sometimes say “just because you can, doesn’t make it right.” It applies to a variety of situations.

Also, If there was a cross burning in my in my neighborhood or in my city, my sense of freedom would be diminished even though it doesn’t affect my rights.

Further, Let’s say someone intentionally murdered my family member and then served prison time. Upon release from prison (paroled after several years) that person has the “right” to buy the house next door to me; and does. Suddenly, their “right” has ruined any freedom I feel, even though it doesn’t “prevent me from working from where I want to work”, as you stated. It just doesn’t seem that simple.

I can’t win the argument you are making but I’m ok with my pov. Thanks.
http://asalesguy.com Keenan

It’s not about winning here. You bring up great points.

If we were to measure freedom based feeling or sense of freedom vs actual freedom how do you think that would change things?

Take your POV and turn it on yourself. If someone felt your lifestyle, religion, etc made them feel less free should they have a right to make you to stop?

Is “feeling free” or “sense of freedom” enough to inhibit others freedom?
http://brandonhull.com BrandonH

I’m okay with this entire argument. But why is there not a similar post that makes the point that dislike of something doesn’t equal hatred?
http://asalesguy.com Keenan

That would be good post. I like that. Will think this through for a future post. It’s a great point.

I don’t think dislike equals hatred. Hatred is how people respond. Hatred, does little to allow flexibility. People who dislike something can be flexible and tolerant. Hatred can not be.
http://uptownuncorked.com geechee_girl

I love this. It goes in the must read column.
http://www.iamronen.com iamronen

great post Keenan – but I believe you are oversimplifying in a potentially damaging way:

there is more then one kind of freedom:
http://iamronen.com/2010/05/reading-lila-machine-language/

some more evolved freedoms are destined to annihilate other less evolved freedoms:
http://iamronen.com/2010/05/reading-lila-morals-ideas-kill-societies/

some less evolved freedoms need to be destroyed to nurture more advanced freedoms:
http://iamronen.com/2010/05/reading-lila-ruthlessness/

Don’t Confuse Like with Rights

Keenan 411

Get My Newsletter

Polls

Polls

Archives

Categories

Translation