1. What freedom do we not now enjoy that the right wants to secure for us?

[enki23]

Anyone? Any one?

2. Which do they, by their admission, intend to take away?

3. Which do they intend to stop us from acquiring in the future?

Be fair. Consider this an audit. I want to see how well the party of "FREEDOM" (fries) honestly fares.

[annabanana]

1. They are 1/2 way done taking away

due process, freedom of assembly, being secure in person & property
(The president can, now, today, for reasons he's allowed to keep secret, declare YOU an "enemy combatant" and ALL BETS ARE OFF)

[Crunchy Frog]

2. The want us to have the freedom

to impose our religious beliefs on others. Just so long as they're the "correct" religious beliefs. The freedom to shove your religion down other people's throats is a vital one. The founding fathers would have wanted it that way.:sarcasm:

[Don Claybrook]

3. The freedom that they advocate is always nonspecific

Answers to your questions:

1. They want to give us the freedom of an ownership society? Seriously, that's an excellent question, because it has no good answer.

2. Reproductive rights, the right to privacy, the 4th amendment, the 1st amendment, states rights (medmarijuana, assisted suicide, unfunded mandates).

3. self-government, the right to assemble, the right to move up the socio-economic ladder.

[eagler]

4. We are denied the opportunity to compete head on with

the right-wing media over the airwaves which belong to us - the people due to the lack of a viable fairness doctrine.MILLIONS upon millions of Americans have no access to liberal leaning talk shows. All they hear is Limbaugh and his character assassinating diatribes and lies plus all of the other wingnut hosts. This has been allowed to go on since 1987 and its no wonder Dems lost the South and a big part of the middle states. In short we have lost our freedom of speech.

[Burma Jones]

5. The Freedom to discriminate against people

I think they would like to roll back Public Accomodations laws and allow business owners freedom of association. I think they would like to free us from the obligations of the Civil Rights and the Voting Acts.

I think they would like to reduce the size of government to the state it was in during the McKinley Administration - Teddy Roosevelt was far too Socialist for these folks..... This would free us from Government coercion.

I think they would like to allow property owners the freedom to do whatever they like with their property regardless of whether it impacts the quality of life of others. They would also like to grant these property owners immunity from liability for the harm they do.

Freedom and Equality are exclusive. You can have both, but when you pass laws restricting some persons' actions in order to foster equality, you have indeed restricted some persons' freedom. We all give up some measure of freedom in order to live in a society.

They would, of course, remove reproductive rights from the table. I believe some of them would also like to see a version of the Alien and Sedition Acts that John Adams enacted - I think some would like to see what they feel is anti-American not be given air time. They would take away our right to sue - they are doing it now. They would take away privacy rights. They would take away protections of minority rights. They would take away protection of the rights of the accused.

[enki23]

7. hmm...

in what way would they reduce the "size" of government? have we any evidence that they would actually do that? republicans have almost complete control of the federal government, and i haven't seen any serious attempts to limit its power since they gained it.

i agree that they intend to increase the freedom of property owners, in a narrow sense, to do some things that aren't now allowed. however, the majority of them oppose any serious right to privacy, even in one's own home. so clearly there are numerous freedoms they *don't* intend property owners to enjoy on their own holdings. when extolling the rights of property owners, you'll notice, they almost never publicly acknowledge the very obvious reality that one's actions can affect one's neighbors, even if you don't actually set foot (or wheel) on the surface of their land. but most of them are bright enough, in private, to know better. i don't see much substantial increase in any practical rights here, with one exception. any regulation solely designed to protect the health of either public land, or of lower classes of citizen, would certainly be overturned. of course, that would mostly be remedied by allowing the wealthy (and others, tee hee) the right to obtain private ownership of all (or, at least, most) public property.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

6. Lets see.

That they want to secure.

:-Gun rights.

:-Freedom from taxation, in theory, although my understanding is ]
that the policies of the current administration haven't led to non-
trivial tax cuts for any but the richest. Nevertheless, I think
it's only fair to admit that taxes would be lower in a society run
on genuine conservative principles than in one run on genuine
liberal ones.

:-It's stretching it a bit, but one could argue that the right's
long-term attempts to allow public officials to make their
Christianity a part of their office is a defence of their
freedoms, of a sort.

:-One could make a case that opposition to positive discrimination
was supporting a freedom.

That they want to remove or prevent.

:-Abortion

:-Presumption of innocence (vide Guantanamo)

:-Separation of church and state

:-Freedom from poverty - slightly dubious, because it's a negative
freedom, but I think probably fair to list.

:-Sexual freedom - not all conservatives want to make homosexuality
and the like illegal, but I suspect that many do, and most want to
make life as difficult for homosexuals.

:-Freedom to take drugs. I have to say, I agree with them on this
one, as do most other liberals, but many also don't.

:-A whole range of freedoms which both right and left agree should
be restricted - no-one anywhere on the political spectrum supports
the freedom to murder, rape or steal.

I'm sure there are others, but that will do to be getting on with.