Should People Give Up Their Personal Freedom In Giver, By Lois Lowry

In the book Giver, which is written by Lois Lowry, the people do away with almost any personal freedom we can think of. For example, they cannot perceive color, they cannot love someone (they are programmed to lose that capacity by a medicine.), and they cannot have a baby of their own, but instead they can have a baby that the society choose for them. In short, the society takes control of almost any fundamental human function. The reason the society does that is to keep the society comfortable and safe. Indeed, it is successful in doing that. However, if we are asked to live in society, few of us would feel willing to.
That brings us to the question, “should people give up their personal freedom in order to preserve the common good.” In my

When we look back at the modern world we live in, it is clear that there are certain rights we do not have, so that our lives are kept safe. The society has to forbid people from doing things that endanger the society. Suppose that we have the freedom to murder anyone we hate. Though it seems to increase our freedom, any of us would stop the society from enabling that right to the people. The reason is simple. If the freedom to murder were allowed, we would live a life full of fear. We would not be able to prevent ourselves from being killed because murder is legal. As is seen in this example, one reason the society robs people of some freedom is because it helps to provide people a more comfortable place to live.
However, the society’s restriction of freedom should not go so far as to restrict people’s happiness. In Giver, the people even give up the freedom to love. They are controlled by the medicine not to have any sexual desire, their mates are chosen automatically by the society, and they have to apply for a child in order to have one. Actually, this system helps a lot to keep the society comfortable and safe. First, there is no love affair. There is obviously

We human beings need that fundamental happiness. Therefore, it could be said that society should not regard steadiness as the only common good and go extreme to preserve safety. Nevertheless, situations exist where people have to abandon some rights to be happy. Now, we can infer more by taking a look at the freedom of information. It seems very natural that freedom to know is one of the basic rights of us and therefore should be preserved with first priority. For instance, if the nation is able to hide information about how the budget is used, it is probable that the government workers begin to use the budget with a selfish purpose.
Indeed, that is what the history has witnessed in many places. However, when it comes to information about how one country’s missile defense system works, that kind of information should not always be allowed free access to anyone. If anyone can easily analyze the way the missile defense system works, shortly afterwards a hostile country creates a more powerful weapon via leakage of information provided by spies. The freedom of information should sometimes be

restricted in order to keep the country safe. In other words, people