Rousseau vs. Locke

[itismesaj]

Do you believe that governments ought to provide the rights of life, liberty, and property to each and every one of their citizens, regardless of cost? (Locke)

Or, do you believe that citizens must give up some rights in order to propagate the society as a whole, decreasing the burden of the government? (Rousseau)

So, basically, I'm asking which is more important: the individual, or the society?

[numerator-91]

society of course. to say the individual is more important is selfish and ignorant

[freetibet]

i say the government should just stay the F*ck away. ya you should put mankind before just yourself but that doesn't mean you gotta surrender your rights. In fact I don't even see how surrender rights would ever help anybody. I mean really how does giving up my right to say... free speech help anybody? I say society first but f*ck whoever this french f*ck is

P.S. this place sux balls we don't need 2 forums on religion

[meat]

the society is more important. however, the people cant make the government responsible for everything dealing with the well being of the citizens. the citizens should be responsible for helping each other.

[Raist]

society of course. to say the individual is more important is selfish and ignorant

The point of the society is to improve the life of the individuals. If they begin taking away rights, they lose purpose, society for the sake of society is the downfall of man.

[ItsAPoorlyKeptSecret]

The individual is more important and to say that is ignorant is to be ignorant yourself nemo.

[Deetinator]

Society is more important but I don't believe the government should make you sacrifice for someone else, other than taxes. Ex: If there's a just war, and you are able, you should volunteer. They shouldn't have to draft, and it would be wrong for them to do so. However its just as wrong for you to not volunteer when you know you should.

Also, if individuals took care of themselves and then some, society would be great.

[Resilience]

You can agree with Locke and believe society is more important as a whole. Personally, I think you have to take it in a case by case scenario and look at the society itself, such as is it a despotic government and other factors. That type of society can thrive with the majority of the people being supressed and mistreated, and in that case in my personal opinion the individual should be more important than the society until the society has made reforms to make life better for the individual.

Can someone move this to enlightened individuals to spark discussion?