Liberalism seeks to absolve people of personal responsibility

Welfare: First off, you assume that every penny that the government uses would automatically go to welfare sytle chrity were there to be no welfare tax. Beyond that, many charitable ocntributions go to places like church or city projects. The closest thing to a substantial welfare is money that goes overseas to places like africa, ect. A non-welfare system doesnt work unless you pool all the charity given (again, assuming that youd get the same amount) and distribute it to the causes that it currently goes to. In that circumstance, youre doing the same tihng the government does. Welfare doenst seek to absolve responsibility to give charity, it just takes charity in a more uniform fashion SS: This is basically the same issue. Not everyone can save thier money, no matter how many dollars they dont give for social security of others. If youve been working all your life at a factory and make just enough to get the absolute necesities for your family, you dont have enough to save a substantial amount. You assume that a company with more money will pay its employees more, so this hypothetical doenst exist, but that would only be true if you substaintially raised the minimum wage which you also claim is another liberal ploy to resolve responsibility (see corperate morality). Your train of thought is circular in this sense. Healthcare: My assumption is that when you give an insurence company the freedom to charge at will, they will. And becuase of that, not everyone will ever be able to afford healthcare. Education: To keep from repetition, ill just say the last three answer this. All four of the preceeding points are examples of times where the government is given more repsonsibility to take care of its people and the people who can afford these great institutions (SS, healthcare, what have you) are given, not absolved of, the responsibilities to take care of those who dont have them. Abortion: If you want to sell your software and i want to buy it, that is both of our rights. Its not like abortion doctors are acting agianst thier own will, they believe abortion to be ok. So your example doesnt really make sense. And liberalism doesnt say that, it only says that I, an individual, am not at liberty to infringe upon your rights. Abortions dont happen the way you seem to paint them. Sure, some are irresponsible, but in total its a last resort and often a very emotionally taxing process. Its not actually an easy way out for most. Death Penalty: Again, you make prison sound like a vacation resort. Besides that, it shouldnt be our aim to punish but to isolate those who are commited criminals. I agree its not the norm to be able to rehabilitate. I believe sentances shouldnt be based upon serverity of crime but on advancment in rehabilitation. A burgler who has shown no reason to believe that he will ever be a repsonsible member of society shouldnt simply be held for the time that the law predetermined, but rather, isolated so that he never harms again. This makes law take an active role rather than a beuricratic one. Corperations: In your logical reasoning, the goal of the union should be to be heard but make no change. Being someone who has a good amount of knowledge of corperate abuse on the people, i can say that corperations, in general, have proven that they arent responsible on there own. That puts responsibility on the people, not the corperation, which in many cases cant handle that responsibility. War: Isolationism and pacifism are absolutely two completely different things. The entire legislative branch voted for Iraq (when it was maj. republican i might add) because of circumstances and lies. but as you say, thats off topic. My point is only to say that liberalism asks for diplomacy and non-violent action where as declaring war on weaker nations is often the easy way out. Youre completely confusing wanting to help society with authoritarianism. The line you draw is beyond hazy. I see your logic, but youre assuming that a completely illogical, government free system will solve all of our problems. Asking for a more involved, more responsible, more civicaly minded government is not seeking to absolve people of their responsibilities, but rather, put responsibility on the government.