Spokane7
33°
Significantly, there is a strong correlation between conservatism and freedom on the one hand 
and liberalism and bondage on the other. The states that are most free tend to be the most conservative politically: S. Dakota, Colorado, Texas, Missouri, Tennessee, Arizona, Virginia and N. Dakota join Idaho in the top ten,! while the least free states are without exception bastions of statism run wild: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Washington, Hawaii and California all have the dubious honor of being in the bottom ten. This gives the lie to the myth that conservatives are the repressive ones. The truth, as is often the case, turns out to be the exact opposite. The more liberal a state is, the less likely it is to offer its residents genuine personal and financial freedom/Bryan Fischer, Idaho Values Alliance. More here.
Question: Do you agree with the IVA conclusion that conservative states are the freest?
D.F. Oliveria is a columnist and blogger for The Spokesman-Review. Huckleberries Online was judged the best 2008 Idaho newspaper blog by the Idaho Press Club. And the best 2007 news blog in the Pacific Northwest by the Society for Professional Journalist. Print Huckleberries is a past winner of the Herb Caen Memorial Column contest by the National Association of Newspaper Columnists. The Readership Institute of Northwestern University cited this blog as a good example of online community journalism.
999 W. Riverside, Spokane, WA 99201
P.O. Box 2160, Spokane, WA 99210
Main switchboard: (509) 459-5000 • (800) 338-8801
Newsroom: (509) 459-5400 • (800) 789-0029
Customer service: (800) 338-8801
© Copyright 2012, The Spokesman-Review
Terms of use • Privacy policy • Copyright policy
Find DFO on Facebook
DFO on Twitter
toadman on May 06 at 4:09 p.m.
Does Fischer even listen to himself? Where’s his quantifiable data to support this claim? How does he define “free?” (I could come up with a number of other variables…but I’ll refrain.)
toadman on May 06 at 4:11 p.m.
From the article he references:
“We find that the freest states in the country are New Hampshire, Colorado, and South Dakota, which together achieve a virtual tie for first place.”
Uh.. ok.. so top spot goes to two blue states and a red state? Nice.
Sisyphus on May 06 at 4:17 p.m.
Tell it to the gay people who wanna get married.
toadman on May 06 at 4:17 p.m.
Sorry.. I’m just dubious of studies like this, because I think “freedom” is a subjective term, open to a variety of interpretations, making studies like the one done by George Mason University useless exercises in statistics.
toadman on May 06 at 4:18 p.m.
“Tell it to the gay people who wanna get married.”
Which you can’t do in Alaska, apparently the winner of the “personal freedom” award in this study.
CDAbob on May 06 at 4:28 p.m.
In my adult life I have lived in Oregon (liberal),
California (liberal), New Jersey (very liberal) and Idaho
(conservative). There is no question in my mind that
the more liberal the state, the less personal freedom
I had. New Jersey has lost so many personal freedoms
that the people don’t even know what they were any
longer. Yes, I believe that IVA has hit the nail on the head.
And my hat is off to Alaska!
idawa on May 06 at 4:32 p.m.
silly toad, don’t you know that freedom is low taxes and a government that mirrors conservative Christian values…
Anyway, isn’t this a repeat topic? If you actually read the report he cites, the author acknowledge that even a citizen of New York has more freedom than any one else in this world, except for someone in Alaska it seems. I suppose if the choice is to give up absolute dominion over my property to live in New York or Hawaii versus living in N. Dakota or Alaska, I guess that a sacrifice I’m willing to make…how about you? There is a reason why the West Coat and the North East are more densely populated then the “free states” he opines for … and it isn’t the weather.
toadman on May 06 at 4:37 p.m.
“silly toad, don’t you know that freedom is low taxes and a government that mirrors conservative Christian values…” -idawa
You had me at “silly toad.”
“the author acknowledge that even a citizen of New York has more freedom than any one else in this world, except for someone in Alaska it seems.” -idawa
Yeah, but can an Alaskan suddenly decide to spend an evening at the Guggenheim or the New York Museum of Natural History? I think not. That’s not freedom to me!!
See? Subjective.
livefreeordie on May 06 at 4:37 p.m.
I completely agree with cdabob.
Been there done that and would not live in the northeast or the icky states of Hawaii, California, Oregon or Washington. Alaska is looking better and better all the time.
hmoffsuite on May 06 at 4:52 p.m.
>>> Question: Do you agree with the IVA conclusion that conservative states are the freest?
Of course I agree with that. In Washington, for example, you need a helmet to ride a motorcycle or bicycle, can’t have a kid under 13 in the front seat, can’t wash your car in the driveway (a Spokane idea), can’t use the dishwasher soap you prefer, etc. etc. The liberal States always “know what is best” for a citizen and make certain to enforce their agenda. Many of their beliefs may have merit, that isn’t the point. I like to simply make my own decisions about what I choose to do and not to do. Not have every damn thing legislated.
hmoffsuite on May 06 at 5:38 p.m.
I just picked up on another example. No smoking cigars on the golf courses, Geez,
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/6420ap_glf_cigars__golf.html
Nick_Adams on May 06 at 6:07 p.m.
No. Colorado is definitely a blue state. NH and SD could be considered purple. Also, it’ll be interesting to see if the NH governor signs the law allowing gay marriage. As Maine’s did today.
Irony/hypocrisy alert: Immediately below Fischer’s post on “Freedom” he issues a call to action for Congress to not approve the District of Columbia’s decision to recognize gay marriages performed in other states. You just can’t make this stuff up.
Phaedrus on May 06 at 6:21 p.m.
I like to simply make my own decisions about what I choose to do and not to do. Not have every damn thing legislated.
I choose to marry my gay lover, but I live in Idaho is that freedom? I choose to not pay the medical bills of the motorcyclist that wasn’t wearing a helmet, but also carried no insurance; in Idaho they take that from my property taxes, is that freedom? On the other hand, I’m a convicted child sex offender but I choose to open a day care center. In Idaho, I can. That’s freedom!
hmoffsuite on May 06 at 6:33 p.m.
No, Phaedrus. Personal freedom requires personal responsibility as well.
Arch_Druid on May 06 at 6:58 p.m.
Hmoffsuite, I’d like to ask free from what? Given the fact that Fischer likes to dictate what “values” he wishes to espouse through his web site, through the legislative process and etc. As for personal freedom comes with personal responsibility, I saw a posted whine about where people can’t light up their coffin nails (cigarettes and cigars). You know that smoking is unhealthy and will kill you sooner or later. But you can’t stop smoking until the state tells you to?
Also saw another posted whine about laundry detergent. I have seen the phosphate argument in no less than the pages of “The Inlander.” The concern here is what damage enough phosphates pollutants would do to the river and anywhere along the route of the river. Which I can certainly understand. So, does Bryan Fischer think that freedom=pollution that increases health costs for anyone living near the polluting industry? Accepting responsibility to clean up pollutions and reduce the health risks to one’s neighbors makes you “unfree?” Now that is wild.
idawa on May 06 at 7:09 p.m.
I am all for freedom, freedom to externalize my costs that is….
hmoffsuite on May 06 at 7:23 p.m.
Arch. If I think smoking is bad for my health, then I can decide whether to smoke or not. If I think phosphates are bad for the aquifer or whatever, the I can decide to not use them. Given proper information on these matters, most people elect to make the same decision as that mandated by the governments. I am fully capable of making a responsible decision. A law doesn’t mean compliance. It only takes away the personal freedom to make the choice.
Arch_Druid on May 06 at 7:36 p.m.
Which means that we shouldn’t have laws against murder, theft, etc.; right Hmoffsuite? As that would take away personal choice? How about Fischer’s seeking laws against abortion that takes away the personal choice of a woman? Or laws that might achieve better day care centers so that working women have some guarantees that the children they take to them will be safe?
Let’s put it bluntly, Fischer lays claim to a bible that is simply chock full of laws. Why doesn’t he simply chuck it in the trash for making him, “unfree?”
Don_Sausser on May 06 at 7:43 p.m.
Idawa, :There is a reason why the West Coat and the North East are more densely populated then the “free states” he opines for … and it isn’t the weather.”
No, I think it’s where the many tax funded jobs are, not that they are searching for a liberal Eden.
hmoffsuite on May 06 at 7:45 p.m.
Arch >> “Which means that we shouldn’t have laws against murder, theft, etc.; right Hmoffsuite?”
That was a silly comment. If you can’t grasp the context of my arguments, then so be it. I don’t support many of the things Fischer comes up with. This thread was based on one position that he has taken. This is one I do agree with. Simple as that.
Arch_Druid on May 06 at 7:55 p.m.
Hmoffsuite, I answer a silly comment with one equally silly. :) Let me explain something a bit more seriously, you can find the 10 commandments in the Hayden City park. That is in fact the only religious scripture to be had in the park. Indeed, Fischer and his ilk would like nothing less than to place 10 commandments as though they were advertisements as far as the eye can see. However, does that make the non Christian inhabitants of this state “free” who are inundated with 10 commandments everywhere that Fischer can put one up? No. Just as you won’t find a Wiccan “church” in the state of Idaho, or a section of a public park dedicated to Druidic worship. So, I think Toadman had it right the first time, define freedom.
I am not as free as I wish to be in this state of Idaho as I am not a Christian. Therefore, Fischer is dead wrong.
Liz on May 06 at 8:26 p.m.
Having lived in three of the most regulated states (Cali, Mass and Washington state) I have to say I do agree with this.
When I moved out here from MA, I had to pinch myself over the absence of political correctness around every turn.
There is a reason that people crack jokes about “the people’s republic of Massachusetts” and so on…
idawa on May 06 at 8:35 p.m.
I don’t know Don, seem that most of the States that are on this list happen to be the biggest federal welfare queens in the Union You have Idaho at #20, super free Alaska at #3, N. Dakota at #6, and Alabama at #7. Good thing all of liberals here in Washington, New York, and California are so friendly - we don’t mind giving our hard earned tax dollars to the good old self reliant freedom queens who apparently can’t pay for their own stuff. Kind of like Texas, who recently proudly proclaimed they were a sovereign state and then the next day went running to the federal government to protect them form the big old bad flu.
idawa on May 06 at 8:44 p.m.
Just as an aside, I actually agree with the sentiment, there are certain aspects of freedom that I think conservative value more than democrats. Clearly, in the areas of property right and speech, I give the nod to conservatives. As Aristotle said, “Different men seek after happiness in different ways and by different means, and so make for themselves different modes of life and forms of government.”
Don_Sausser on May 06 at 8:47 p.m.
Yabut Arch, those ten are pretty good social rules to follow. They work for non-Christians too!
Arch_Druid on May 06 at 8:51 p.m.
Yeah, THIS Conservative Idawa believes in free speech. And I get stereotyped as a “liberal” for allowing others to practice what I preach.
Arch_Druid on May 06 at 8:59 p.m.
I have my own set of social rules Sausser. And I have no problem living by the CIVIC rules of the state and the fed gvt. But since I am not a Christian, I don’t care to have your religious rules imposed on me, any more than you would care to have my DRUIDIC rules imposed on you. Even though I feel they are mighty fine rules to live by.
Just so you know.
Don_Sausser on May 06 at 9:06 p.m.
Arch, they aren’t my rules, I also follow my own. And they aren’t pushed on anyone by just being visible anymore than an Exxon billboard pushes me to buy Exxon gasoline.
I agree, use your own rules but you need not feel pushed by a sign.
But you have got to admit, it is hard to argue against any of those ten, religious or not.
Nick_Adams on May 06 at 10:16 p.m.
Don: The largest employer in Idaho, by far, is state government. The feds, I believe are either second or third. Bechtel—the contractor operating the INL (a federally owned facility) is now the largest private employer.
If you add in school districts and local governments, it’s clear that there’s no shortage of those tax-payer funded jobs in Idaho.
My guess is that is pretty standard per state, no matter how liberal or conservative it is.
northidahonative on May 07 at 9:27 a.m.
The George Mason University and its Mercatus Center, you’d have a hard time finding any university or “research center” that could be any more right wing. Most of the University and Center funding comes from libertarian and conservative groups, along with grants from companies like Exxon Mobile and various Free Trade organizations. Not an overly reliable source of information or statistics unless you are grasping for references to impress the right wing sheep.
scootermom on May 07 at 10:19 a.m.
Fischer’s version of “freedom” denies basic rights to women, gays and lesbians, immigrants, and non-Christians,
That’s not very free.
Phaedrus on May 07 at 10:35 a.m.
If I think phosphates are bad for the aquifer or whatever, the I can decide to not use them
It is not your aquifer it belongs to all the people, why do you believe that you should get to decide how it is best treated?
northidahonative on May 07 at 10:41 a.m.
Scootermom, Idaho Republicans support the rights of Immigrants, at least the rights of Illegal Immigrants. Just a couple of weeks ago Idaho’s Republican Legislature decided that Illegal Labor was NECESSARY for Idaho farmers to survive and that those who knowingly employ Illegals should not be prosecuted or punished. How many millions of Idaho Tax payer money are spent each year on supporting the “Rights” of illegals?
Idaho farmers can’t operate profitably without operating illegally it seems, if I call myself a Republican Farmer could I pick and choose which laws I want to obey?
Sisyphus on May 07 at 10:44 a.m.
Sure hmoff, its all about where the demarcation line is drawn. Sometimes its necessary make rules for the common good. Certainly you don’t think that if your neighbor is a royal pain in the a$$, then you can be free to shoot him. You can’t poison a guy’s well and expect no repercussions.
Arch_Druid on May 07 at 7:44 p.m.
Actually, Sausser, I see guys like Fischer who just love putting on display 10 commandments everywhere that the eye can see continually arguing with them. This scripture can be found in Isaiah: “They speak Lord, Lord with their lips and keep their hearts far from him.” That fits Fischer to a Tee.
Instead of treating the 10 commandments like an advertisement, how about simply following them? That would be far better proof as to your standing before your God than how many “reminders” you put up. As it is, I recall a thread of some weeks back as to why people were beginning to leave the church. I can think of one reason, guys like Fischer who have simply become overbearing.
RobertMcDiarmid on May 13 at 9:17 a.m.
Fischer’s latest ridiculous statement that “conservative states are more free” is very easy for a white religious conservative male to say. Has Fischer ever looked at the privileged place from where he speaks?
White Men in America have their freedom handed to them on a silver platter - - they never have to worry about civil rights legislation or constitutional amendments to take away their rights. I wonder if a person in a minority feels the same way about the “utopian free” Idaho that Fischer portrays? I wonder if women feel they have the same rights and freedoms as Fischer.
His arrogance - particularly when he claims to be a man of God - is shameful.
I lived in Idaho for seven years. As a gay man I’ve never felt more oppressed and devalued as my time living in Idaho. Fischer loves being right at the center of every situation where he feels that his position on the top of the pyramid is being questioned.
My first encounter with his bigotry and fear-mongering was when he invited Rabbi Lapin (The Jewish Dr. Laura) to “debate” Rabbi Fink, Boise’s amazing open-minded Rabbi. He timed his invitation and press stunt while Rabbi Fink was out of town on his well known annual summer vacation hiking in Idaho’s mountains.
That Fischer continues to be the mouthpiece for the conservative religious movement in Idaho does their cause no favors. Fischer is a sociological and religious dinosaur who represents a quickly disheartening fringe viewpoint. Open minded people read his opinions and laugh out loud. For example his septic fit over the possibility that our next Supreme Court Justice (gasp!) might be lesbian.
I look forward to the day when I return to the floor of the Idaho Legislature and see the gay marriage amendment repealed. Granted - it will take the Supreme Court of the United States to recognize the rights for all people. (Just like it took a Supreme Court ruling to do away with Idaho’s sodomy statute) I know that Idaho - thanks to the ‘leadership’ of people like Fischer and the other white men in charge of Idaho’s legislature - will be the last of all states to repeal their amendment.
I hope Fischer lives to see that same day - when his viewpoint is rendered dangerously old-fashioned and frankly - irrelevant.