The Line Between Personal Freedoms and Public Safety How much freedom are you willing to give up for a peaceful society? In The Giver, Lois Lowry creates a community where there are almost no personal freedoms. This is the price for a blissful, content, pain-free community or society. No color, no choice in marriage, no real emotions. The line between personal freedoms and public safety should be about even, but leaning more on the personal freedoms scale. The Giver community gives up many personal freedoms, and it’s in the idea that personal freedoms are easily given up for a clean, secure community. Color, personal freedoms, love and other emotions are a larger part of our world than people think. Imagine the world without color, love,
…show more content…
Jonas’ community does not have the freedom to choose what clothes to wear, who to marry, what job to have, and what their children's’ names are. The clothes are all the same, there are arranged marriages, people are constantly correcting language, apologizing for being late, apologizing for interrupting, apologizing for pretty much anything they do wrong. “Even the children were scolded if they used the term lightly at play, jeering at a teammate who had missed a catch or stumbled in a race. Jonas had done it once...and had been taken aside for a brief and serious talk by the coach” (p.3). Jonas had exclaimed “That’s it Asher! You’re released!” Freedom of speech is extremely limited. The Giver tells Jonas that long ago, the Council of Elders chose to limit personal freedoms, in fear that if there were many freedoms, people would choose the wrong way, and their decision would be catastrophic. Our society, the country even, have most of these rights. People can marry whoever they want, and say whatever they want. They can work wherever they want, and wear whatever they want. In San Francisco, people are allowed to walk around naked. Apparently personal freedoms are more important than public safety. Some people say that your choices are what define you. To have those choices could end in disaster, and pain, and sadness. But all those are worth having people decide what they want to be and who they want to
Jonas’ community does not have the freedom to choose what clothes to wear, who to marry, what job to have, and what their children's’ names are. The clothes are all the same, there are arranged marriages, people are constantly correcting language, apologizing for being late, apologizing for interrupting, apologizing for pretty much anything they do wrong. “Even the children were scolded if they used the term lightly at play, jeering at a teammate who had missed a catch or stumbled in a race. Jonas had done it once...and had been taken aside for a brief and serious talk by the coach” (p.3). Jonas had exclaimed “That’s it Asher! You’re released!” Freedom of speech is extremely limited. The Giver tells Jonas that long ago, the Council of Elders chose to limit personal freedoms, in fear that if there were many freedoms, people would choose the wrong way, and their decision would be catastrophic. Our society, the country even, have most of these rights. People can marry whoever they want, and say whatever they want. They can work wherever they want, and wear whatever they want. In San Francisco, people are allowed to walk around naked. Apparently personal freedoms are more important than public safety. Some people say that your choices are what define you. To have those choices could end in disaster, and pain, and sadness. But all those are worth having people decide what they want to be and who they want to