Rights, liberty are different

Re: “America’s forgotten foundation: Individual liberty,” Tanner Rowe, July 6):

After reading this article I have to conclude the writer is not offering a description of the exchange of ideas but his prescription of the state of politics in our country today. There is a clear difference between “rights” and “liberty.” Rights are the legal and moral entitlement to act in a certain way. Liberty is being able to act as one pleases. These are different but certainly are connected.

The First Amendment provides for freedom of speech as a right. Regardless, I do not have the liberty to yell fire in a crowded theater. This right, like all others, is not without limits.

The article references the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. If I believe that mentally challenged people, people under a certain age or on a no-fly list should not have unfettered access to guns, I am not against or reject the Second Amendment any more than denying someone the liberty to yell fire translates to disregard of the First Amendment.

The Fourth Amendment protects against illegal search and seizure. This amendment seems most open for debate, challenges and expansion on behalf of law enforcement.

Our rights are not absolute – nor is our liberty to act. Your rights end where mine begin. We must recognize it is not 1776 and that our Constitution was written to grow and still guarantee our rights. If we can recognize each other’s legitimate concerns then our democracy will be guaranteed and our rights safeguarded.

Phil Ward

Coeur d’Alene