Burlington High School
Burlington, Kansas
Teacher: Devra Parker

All for One: Have We Forgotten One for All?
By: Kristi Kesler
12th grade

 

 

Victor E. Frankl once stated, with good reason: "I recommend that the Statue of Liberty be supplemented by a Statue of Responsibility on the west coast. "In today's society many people seem to view their own personal morals, needs and ambitions above those of their...neighbors. Egocentrism is the termite that creeps in through the foundational Bill of Rights and then disintegrates the edifice of our nation. Naturally, it is the duty of the people to take measure to control this pest that plagues the nation, even if that means putting up with laws that are inconvenient or irritating.

 

The hope that society as a whole wants what is best for our nation is a beautiful concept that I would love to believe. However, in reality, human nature causes us to be selfish at times. Some people really do care about their community and that is how it should be. Sadly, too many Americans find pleasure in hurting others or are just indifferent to the general welfare. Laws are beneficial because they motivate people to attempt to live for the greater good. In the wise words of Herbert Spencer, "The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools." This truth can be applied to the effects of human greed when there is no attempt to stifle it.

Doing away with individual freedom and replacing it with a standard code of rules and regulation would be preposterous. Instead, a happy medium [should be found]. Yes, I do think that some countries, such as those that ban free press, have way too many government restrictions. Of course, I also believe that certain laws are necessary and generally beneficial such as those that require fathers to pay child support. These laws force people to be responsible when they will not do so on their own. Our Founding Fathers did not expect our government to take away every right that could become potentially harmful, such as the right to bear arms, and neither should we. If we did so, citizens of the United States would have less freedom than they did under British rule. For example, countless victims are killed in car crashes every year. Should we overlook the benefits of quick transportation and outlaw it in order to promote the safety of mankind? No, instead we should blame … human [frailty].

 

Even if there were more laws…there would still be those who commit crimes and disrespect others. It seems that in any group it is a struggle to restrict those who abuse their freedom without also causing the innocent to suffer. For example, at my high school there are firewalls that block the use of countless websites and images on the internet. This is so frustrating to a student who just wants to research a topic for an assignment or find a picture for a poster. If fellow peers could be trusted to be responsible, then the administration would give us more freedom. [Irresponsible] people [limit]  individual liberty. Americans cannot blame the government for what we have done to ourselves. A few issues that have caused a great deal of controversy in this country and could be solved if our neighbors had a little more integrity are alcohol consumption, all kinds of drug use from marijuana to cold medicine, and piracy on the World Wide Web. …

There is a fine line between exercising one’s own personal rights and blatantly disregarding the rights of others. I believe that it is a person’s right to harm his/her own body. In contrast, that same person has no justification to cause destruction and sickness in the body of a person next to him/her who does not want to smoke. If a person needs to inhale tobacco, he/she should do so in private. A law that bands smoking in public places does [little to hinder] anyone in his/her pursuit of happiness. When other’s views differ from ours, we find that in order for one person to have his/her individual rights granted, we may have to compromise one of ours. This is a very complex relationship because every American lives by a different set of morals. For instance, those who believe in one nation under God do not wish to deny his existence. At the same time, atheists do not want to be forced to acknowledge a higher power.

 

If everyone really cared about the person next to them, they would not purposely offend or harass [that person]. By not allowing people to use their unique talents and interests to excel in the economy, society loses…. When citizens become so inwardly focused that they no longer find a need to work together to [improve] the nation, then the common good begins to crumble. On the flip side, when we as American bring all our different strengths to the table and use them in tandem, we can accomplish great feats. After all, whatever happened to the “United” States?

Thus, in calling ourselves Americans, we admit that we belong to a common identity like a giant family living in one house.  Our Founding Fathers worked hard to build a great country in which everyone is equal.  Let us keep our home a secure place for ourselves, our posterity, and the fellow beings we share it with, instead of tearing it apart.  As Gloria Evangelina Anzaldua once said, "What we say and what we do ultimately comes back to us so let us own our responsibility, place it in our hands, and carry it with dignity and strength.”

 

Answers to Questions Regarding the Required Reading

 

Q1-What do you think Justin Reiter meant by including the following in his essay?
“…if the people are not accustomed to the freedom they will be angered by the inequality.” Were you angered by some of the things Justin said in his essay? Did you agree or disagree?
 

I think that Justin is mistaken when he attempts to turn a ripple in the ocean into a tsunami. This being the effect a democracy has on personal income of the people. It is true that not all American’s make the same amount of money, however; this reflects the diversity of people in general, not the form of our government. I do not think freedom is ever the cause of inequality. This is just illogical. Although, we all have certain inalienable rights as human beings, we cannot be robotic clones of each other. We are all born with certain talents, faults, and unique traits.
 

Same and equal are not interchangeable words in the discussion of individuals. Moreover, I do not think that it is possible for any country to exist as a perfect utopian society. Even in Communist countries where individual freedoms are taken away, society still has its upper and lower classes. In these countries the government has all the money, while its people suffer. I disagree with Justin; I don’t consider this equal at all. Those who live in Communist countries would not be angered if suddenly they had freedom to pursuit happiness or more specifically wealth.

Q2- Explain: “He felt that the common good could be served by each individual pursuing self-interest.” To whom did Chris Carney attribute these feelings?
 

I think this statement is another way of saying that James Madison believed it is important for individuals in society to choose what part of the work force they want to contribute to as opposed to a nation that requires people to do a specific task selected for them. Because people are diverse, the wide spectra of jobs a functioning economy operates on will be filled without assigning certain people to tasks at birth.  

Q3- In the next to the last paragraph in her essay, Faith Doyle discuses Emperor Diocletian and his Edict of 301. Relate that to the essay topic.
 

Basically, this Emperor attempted to better Rome by making all income and opportunity equal. Sadly, he did not realize that the common good of the country stems from the personal responsibility of pursuing a mean of income that is successful or beneficial to society. Here is where the crucial element of individual liberty comes into play. By not allowing people to excel in the economy through their unique talents and interest, society becomes dependent on the government and loses motivation to invent, compete, and improve. This hurts everyone.

Q4- Kelly Lanier says in her essay: “Even though everyone is born with the same rights here in America; sometimes a person can step on or take away the rights of another person.” Relate the example she gives and give us another one of your own.
 

Kelly is saying that when freedom is misused or when others views differ from ours we find that in order for one person to have their individual rights granted, another has to sacrifice one of theirs. For example, if a Christian wanted to pray in school that should be their right, however an atheist may consider a time for prayer in school an encroachment of their right for freedom of religion.

Q5- Explain what Joshua Spencer means when he says that “individual liberty is a fragile, yet powerful, asset.” How does he relate individual liberty to dictators? Do you agree with his assessment? Why or why not? Be specific.
 

In a nutshell, Joshua believes that a corrupt government can very easily shatter individual liberty. In the same way it is also an incredible force when it comes to bonding together in a common purpose. When we as Americans bring all our different strengths to the table and use them in tandem, we can accomplish great feats. For instance the colonies proved victorious against the oppressive monarchy of Great Britain. I agree with Joshua. When citizens become so dependent on its government that they no longer find a need to compete or work together to better the nation, then the common good begins to crumble at its very foundations.

Q6-Luck Hall asked “Will we maintain our freedom or destroy it to be safe?” How would you answer that question?
 

Luke makes a logical point. If Americans continue to push for laws banning all that is potentially dangerous, citizens of this country will forfeit essentially all of their rights. For example, countless citizens of this country are killed in car crashes every year. Should we overlook the benefits of quick transportation and outlaw it in order to promote the general welfare? No, instead we should point the blame at the true cause of destruction, inevitable human fallibility.

 

Q7- Some people, according to which student essayist in 1999, suggested that “the Constitution's framers might have 'put greater emphasis on the protection of the community over individual liberty', had they seen the world today.”? She doesn’t agree.  Do You?

 

I agree with the essayist, Molly McGlone, on the issue. If the founding fathers took away every right that could become potential dangerous, such as the right to bare arms, then citizens of the United states would have less freedom than they did under British rule. Even if there were more laws about what a person could constitutionally do, there would still be those who commit crimes against and disrespect others.

 

Q8- “Just because a law may achieve desirable results, it should not take precedence over the Constitution.” Do you agree or disagree?  Aaron Traffas, discusses the Ban on Smoking in Public Places and the Gun Free School Zones Act.  How do you personally feel about these two issues?

 

As far as the first issue goes, I believe that although it is a person’s right to harm their body if they want to. In contrast, that same person does not have a right to cause destruction and sickness in the body of a person next to them who does not want to smoke. If a person wants to do so they should do so in private. A law that bans smoking in public places does not step on anyone’s rights. Now I feel the same way about banning guns in school. School is an environment for learning, not hunting. There is no reason that a person would need a gun in school. How does a law like this hurt anyone?
 

Q9- Annie St. Romain referred to a book in her essay where “the government regulated every possible aspect of human life from profession to family to emotions.” What was the name of that book?  Have you read it?

 

This book is called “the Giver”. I have read it and actually, it is by my favorite author. This book holds so many frightening truths. Lois Lowery vividly describes a society in which individual liberties are taken away so well that it makes the viewer feel as if they are there. It really made me appreciate how lucky I am to live in a free nation.

 

Q10- “As nations grow in size and social complexity, governments claim greater powers to restrain individuals and groups.  Those who criticize this development believe that it has gone so far as to threaten the existence of individual liberty.  Others believe that only if government is granted such powers, can complex problems be solved.” This quote can be found in Jessie Veit’s essay.  Which side of the issue do you support and why?

 

I don’t believe this issue is as black and white as people make it out to be. I am almost a fence-rider on this topic because I believe the perfect amount of government control is somewhere in between the two. Yes, I do think that some countries, such as those that ban free press, have way too many government made restrictions. Of course, I also believe that certain laws are necessary and generally beneficial such those that force fathers to pay child support.

 

Q11- Give three examples where personal responsibility would replace the need for laws. Do not duplicate those found in Patrick Karcher’s essay.

 

A few topics that have caused a lot of controversy and could be solved if we could trust our neighbors to be responsible citizens are alcohol consumption, all types of drug use from marijuana to cold medicine, and piracy/downloading on the internet.

 

Q12- It is obvious that Benji Lehman is idealistic.  In his essay he claims when the founding fathers “wrote the constitution they put a great emphasis on each person having personal rights as well as individual liberties. The true strength of each and every community falls on the individual. Believing each man, woman, and child will, and can recognize the importance of good responsibility. … These were laws that gave each and everyone of us the opportunity and self-respect to do the right thing.”  Benji believed that people would make choices that would serve and benefit their communities. Do you believe that? Please explain.

 

Benji’s words create a beautiful concept that I would love to believe. However, in reality, human nature causes us to be selfish at times. Some people really do care about there community and that is how it should be. Sadly, too many individuals find pleasure in hurting others or are just indifferent to the needs of others. That is why there are laws to punish and motivate people to attempt to live for the greater good.

BACK