Freedom

Wow...big topic.  Yeah, I'm pretty sure that any blog post about freedom will come up short, but it's been on my mind the last couple of days.  Most of those who know me will hear me enter into a rant about the pains of "big government" in America.  That's why they avoid me in the halls.  Now, to be clear, I'm not an anarchist.  I don't think anarchy has done anyone any good and I do not see it as a Biblical model.  The early church set up overseers and servants to help govern the people.  But a common thread in the New Testament is clearly the concept of servant leadership, that is, a leader is nothing more than a servant of the people.  I think, in general, this was the type of government our forefathers had in mind as they drafted a government of overseers bound to a series of check and balances which involved the scrutiny of the people.  That thought leaves me to say "hmmmm....What happened?"

My thinking (such as it is) goes directly to personal rights.  We love them; we cherish them, I think we'd marry them if we could.  Even when our personal rights conflict with stated rules, opinions, or another person's personal rights, we expect our right to be met.  But whatever happened to serving the people?

Here's an example:  Let's say a university has a rule about living in the dorms and what criteria is necessary to live in the dorms.  A man for some reason cannot meet the rules and is therefore denied access to the dorms.  Yet he sues and wins the right to live in the dorm.

I know....hot button here...what if the person was disabled, had a dependecy, was in a unique situation, or just plain wanted to be cool.  Well, there are questions there, but look at it from another side.  A rule was clearly stated.  A man was unable to meet that rule.  So he sues (or somebody sues...the details are irrelevant to the example) and gains access.  Where would something like that end?  Should I be allowed to use the womens bathroom since I physically cannot become a women?  Is it not my right to use the womens bathroom? 

I fully realize atrocities have occurred where people who could not defend themselves have required assistance or intervention.  Yet that line continues to blur.  As each of us expects that our own personal rights must not be violated, we in turn know no boundaries.  Instead we break the rules as we ride upon the wave of our own self-justification.  But this is not freedom.  Freedom in not unbridled access to all things.  Rather, freedom speaks to us of release from slavery in all forms.  Freedom is about choice and that choice includes laying down my personal rights so that an order, a balance, can be brought about.  I seek not to enslave others to my personal rights by laying those rights down. 

If this understanding of freedom was universally held, we would ask questions like "How will my actions affect others?", "Will my actions hurt a person or institution?, and "Am I serving my fellow man by my action?".  I do not suggest a perfect society will come from these questions, but I'll bet it'd be a great place to live!!

What do you think?