Where do our freedoms come from?

Jump to Last Post 1-6 of 6 discussions (94 posts)

61
weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years ago
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Enough said. Snark about freedoms coming from our creator reveals a complete disrespect for both freedom and the rights of man.
reply report
1. 60
  Liam Hannanposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I don't see how. The assumption about "the creator" could mean (as it did then) "God" (and even then only the "God" of Protestant Christian Theology is inherently problematic when it comes to freedom) but it could equally mean "arising from the state of man's being" - a statement about our inherent constitution as opposed to a religious belief. If you look at the recent trends in thought on freedom it is usually framed as an inherent part of our natural make up, whether it is located in the capacity for self definition or the ability to make choices it is seen as arising from the process of our creation, and as the process by which we create.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Whether you belive in God or not, matters none. The point of our rights being inherent to us as human beings remains exactly the same. They do not come from statements in books, or legislation or promises of politicians, nor demands for someone else's property or services.
  reply report
  60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  PAY ATTENTION - WE HAVE COME TO THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE!
  
  It's not an issue whether the rights of man have a divine origin. It's not even about any of the rights listed here "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ". Amazingly, it's not about any of rights in the Bill of Rights.
  
  Nope, the teabaggers have pulled a whizzer by inventing a new right. It's the right not to pay taxes you disagree with. No, you won't find that right in the Declaration of Independence or the US Constitution. When you back a wingnut into a corner about the 'tyranny', it always and finally comes down to the craven greed of a miser who objects to paying the toll for living in a country he pretends to love.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  More lies from Doug.
  
  Please don't come post blatant falsehoods here, Doug. You know you're wrong and that it's untrue, so stop insulting yourself by being shown such a slave to your partisanship you'll lie endlessly to advance it.
  
  I have already stated repeatedly what the T EA Party is about, and your fictional nonsense is not needed.
  reply report
  60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  OK - help me out here. I seem to recall that T E A is an acronym for Taxed Enough Already. And the teabagger posts are frequently irrational rants against all federal taxes. So on what basis am I wrong?
  reply report
  60
  Liam Hannanposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I don't want to sound all European on you - but d'uh!
  
  Only in America would the idea that rights derive from a bit of paper arise... the rest of the world uses bits of paper to formalise the rights we feel ought to exist, and the legal/political systems to structure these rights within a societal context.
  
  As for the claim that rights do not arise from the demand for service; I'm afraid you're mistaken. A child has a right to life, this requires a level of service from the mother and father as an inherent part of that right. (Otherwise you come to a place where, being unable to fend for themselves, children forfeit the right to life. It's not an illogical place to be but if you are there you might want to have a check of the old moral compass).
  
  Some rights do entail an inherent level of service, for example the right to freedom of conscience requires a level of service insofar as education is required to understand these things, lack of tyranny (or governmental self restraint) is required to exercise it, and tolerance is required from others in order to practise it.
  reply report
  81
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Not to mention, the people who wrote it owned slaves, had no concern for the rights of the Indians, and thought of women as property!!
  It's false on the face of it.
  
  John Holden is right. Back then, it was all land-holding white men have all these inalienable rights...today, they mean: all Republibaggers!
  No one else need apply.
  reply report
2. 60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I don't argue with any of that apart from to point out that it says "all men" not "all republicans".
  
  I'm glad that you agree that it is wrong to deprive anybody of their freedom and expect to see this reflected in your subsequent posts.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I am ALWAYS an advocate for freedom. If you haven't caught on by now, you're truly in la-la land.
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You always advocate freedom for the right, the left can just shut up!
  reply report
  60
  lady_love158posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Because the left advocates for oppression!
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Does it really!
  Could have fooled me!
  I see much more oppression coming from the right, no abortion, no unions, no minimum wage, for three. Can you produce a similar three for the left?
  reply report
  60
  lady_love158posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  OMG! I can produce an endless list! Everything the left is for oppresses somebody!
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  No, three will do, can't keep you from your searching for scandal too long.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  With Democrats in power, scandal is thrust upon us like a tsunami of evil.
  reply report
  60
  lady_love158posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Welfare
  Healthcare
  Medicare
  Social security
  CFL light bulbs
  Low flush toilets
  Net neutrality
  Student loans
  Banking regulation
  Minimum wage
  Forced unions
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  So, how do any of those restrict freedom?
  Unless it's freedom to die!
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  All of them. They use the power of government to force behavior upon people, over matters over which the government has no delegated authority.
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Of course they have delegated authority, you delegated to them.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  No, they are not. I have the written contract that delegates authority to the federal govenrment, and those things ARE NOT IN THERE.
  report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Tough, you delegated governance to them, not a blow by blow account.
  report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Nope, you are wrong. My contract says, PRECISELY certain things are delegated, and the rest..belong to me. No exception.
  report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Easy:
  
  "I don't want to pay into social security"
  
  "Too bad, pay up or you go to jail"
  
  ... if you can't see why that's a restriction of freedom, then I pity you.
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  This is where freedom becomes complicated, or not, your freedom would deprive another of the freedom to live. Any system, even complete anarchy will trade one freedom off against another.
  
  I could claim the freedom to drive down a busy and foggy street at an unlimited speed but were I to do so I would deprive others of the freedom to walk or drive safely down that street.
  Instead I trade off some of that freedom to preserve the freedom of others.
  reply report
  81
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  No to mention, I don't have enough money to pay your utterly outrageous prices: Oh well, Lose your heat, go hungry, lose your car, home, live on the streets.
  
  Freedom to suffer at the cost of "must make huge profit".
  report
  73
  Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You hit the nail on the head lovemychris.
  
  How can it be called freedom when homeless stats are through the roof?
  
  Doctors visits unaffordable,including insurance premiums.
  
  I appreciate National/Patriotic pride ,but pride doesnt fill the bellys of hungry children ,nor replace a mans dignity.
  report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Abortion, unions, and minimum wage ARE NOT MATTERS OF FREEDOM.
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Ah, so we are now redefining freedom are we!
  They are freedoms in my book.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You still remain clueless.
  reply report
3. 61
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Freedom coming from a "Creator" doesn't necessarily mean a god or anything.
  
  We're all made from earth.
  
  In reality, rights are just naturally infused in us when we're born.
  reply report
4. 71
  drdspervezposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  It's a free world and we are free to do the right thing.
  
  DR.DURRESHAHWAR PERVEZ
  reply report
59
knolyourselfposted 13 years ago
Free mind.
reply report
65
Mishaposted 13 years ago
Freedom comes from inside, there is no other place for it
reply report
60
Doug Hughesposted 13 years ago
There's a good story about the fellow who took over a private park in the city. It had been abandoned for years, and it took a solid year of toil to restore the gardens. A local pastor observed the restoration and in pompous piety told the gardener what a splendid job he thought the Lord and the gardener were doing.

The gardener's response, "Thank you very much, but you should have seen it when the Lord had the place all to Himself."

Think what you will about the origins of the rights of man. It's no skin off my nose if you want to think they came from Sharia Law. But those rights were articulated by man, they are defined by man, They are maintained by those elected & appointed to write & interpret the law.
reply report
1. 61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You are incorrect.
  
  Man's rights are inherent to himself. The only role government has is to NOT interfere with them. It does not define them, enumerate them, or create them. The only thing we have to do is stop government from taking them.
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  But isn't government also involved in protecting rights?
  You know like the right to life, the right to own property, the right to freedom of expression?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  The ONLY legitimate purpose of governance is to prevent our rights from being taken. You have the freedom to express anything. The only way you can lose that, is if government takes it. Life. You already have it. Are you concerned that someone may try to take it?
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  The 'pursuit of happiness' is a vague term that one can argue can be hindered by the structure of any given economic system
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  No, I'm not concerned that somebody may try and take my life.
  I might be though without knowing that government takes a pretty hard line on those who might like to take my life.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  There are courts to slap them on the wrist in the UK for murdering. Isn't that enough?
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Well, if you think life in prison is a slap on the wrist. . .
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Considering you have no freedom in the UK anyway, it seems like little more than going on holiday with bad decorating.
  reply report
  60
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Don't we have freedom in the UK!
  First I knew about that, I'd say more people have more freedom in the UK than in the US.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You still remain clueless.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You don't even have the right to free speech.
  
  You only have the privilege of what the government deigns allow you to say.
  reply report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I have the right to free speech... dunno about you.... If the government tries to prevent me from expressing it, I'll use my right to own a weapon to make it hard on them.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  One might be also concerned that a healthcare system has been created where where one can keep living is based upon how much money they have for medical treatments.
  
  Or should the phrase be changed to "Life (if you can afford it), liberty and the pursuit of happiness"?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You have no right to the services, the labors, the wealth, or possessions of anyone. That includes the doctor, medicine, etc. What you don't own is NOT yours and you have NO right to it.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I have a right to life... how can you create a system that will in effect deprive me of it based on how much money I have?
  
  What about capital punishment.. I am correct assuming you are in favor of the state taking life away in some instances?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Nobody is depriving you of your right to live. Your right to live is your right to live by your best efforts. If someone's invention can extend it, your rights are not denied if they do not give it to you.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Tell a poor dying person that no one is depriving them of their right to live right after some insurance company has cut them off from the medical treatment they need.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  That is absolutely correct. Nobody has .
  
  BTW, did you realize that insurance is a contract, and if you signed on to it, and they are living up to their end of the deal, then you don't even have a complaint?
  
  If they aren't, you can sue them. Happens regularly.
  
  You' re just bitter because you want to violate insurance contracts in your favor all the time and that's stupid.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Bitterness stems from seeing poor people die because they are poor
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Everyone dies, moron. Because they're human.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  true.... its a shame though that the brain dead evidently have access to the internet.
  
  Since your idiotic views aren't winning any converts, you might want to try not being such an SOB
  report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I do believe that under certain circumstances, individuals, by their choice of crimes against others, give up their rights, and that they can be rescinded, not by the government, but only by a unanimous jury of their peers.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  What?!?!?!
  
  Your consistency of approach was admirable (although mostly disagreeable) up to here.
  
  I must admit that it is surprisingly painful to see a champion of the inalienable, God-given rights of man, especially the right to life, willingly give up to the state the right to take away one of a person's most important possessions.
  
  Evidently a people in a free and democratic society do not have the right, through their elected representatives, to establish programs to help one another.... but they can create a big bad government which can set up a court system and laws which will take away the God-given right to life.
  
  Wow
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  The debate rages on. I fall on that side.
  
  Do you want to debate the issue, or just pontificate senselessly?
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  there is no need for a debate... you are very clearly against the government committing the 'crime' of taxing its citizens, but not against it establishing laws and procedures to murder them in certain circumstances.
  
  The any rationalization for your hypocrisy and inconsistency is just that... rationalization..
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  The only thing inconsistent is your integrity. Oh, wait, you have none.
  
  Nowhere do I say taxes are a crime. You just lied.
  
  Oh, wait, I just realized you realized you had already lost the debate, and so you suddenly had to try to change the subject and try to scamper off flinging insults over your shoulder.
  
  Sorry, not only can I win the debate, you'd look like the idiot you're playing.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I gave you the benefit of the doubt
  
  You proved you can;t have a civil debate, and need to resort to name calling when you 'lose' a conversation and are proven to be a hypocrite with poorly thought out ideas .. a typical approach you take in most of these forums.
  report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Hey, buffoon... I'll give you the chance to cash those checks your mouth just wrote. ..
  
  http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/70429
  
  come on over and prepare to eat crow.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  so much anger
  report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Government CAN'T ensure rights. It can only take them.
  
  Government is, by definition, the negation of liberty.
  reply report
  60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You are not in touch with reality.
  
  When the Supreme Court makes a determination that a homophobic loonie church can protest at military funerals they ARE defining freedom of speech. (The decision was correct.)
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  The court can be right, and the court can be wrong. The Constitution only changes as it is amended. Neither its meaning, its intent, nor it limitation on government has ever changed aside from the amendments.
  
  The Supreme Court DOES NOT define what it means, it does.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You realize that is just your wish and not the reality, right?
  
  The court interprets the law, and in doing so defines it.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  No, it is not my wish. It is reality. The fantasy is people who think that SCOTUS can amend the constitution to find anything they want in it.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Since they are so bond, then I gather you support every single verdict of the Supreme Court since its creation as being in line with you understanding of what the Constitution requires?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Of course not. SCOTUS is wrong constantly. Doesn't change the Constitution one iota.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  What it does is determine, through its interpretation of the Constitution, its effect upon the laws of the land...
  
  it may not change what you or I think the Constitution means, but that in reality means squat
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Actually, you're wrong. We have, through our legislators, the right to tell SCOTUS to go hang, and to obey the Constitution.
  
  Didn't know that, eh?
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  What's your point?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You're wrong. As per normal.
  reply report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  the USSC is not my god. They're a bunch of idiots who can't read.
  reply report
2. 73
  Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I certainly believe in God but I am rolling on the floor laughing (at your joke)
  
  I also agree with Misha, real freedom comes from within-
  
  And on the other side of that coin, I live in a land that shouts Freedom ,yet seem unhappy.
  reply report
60
Doug Hughesposted 13 years ago
John, at this point the winners stick their fingers in their ears and shout "La la la la I can't hear you."

When the USA struck down some of FDR's New Deal programs, under a skewed interpretation of the 10th amendment, they applaud that as proper. When a modern court upholds legislation under the Commerce clause or General Welfare, it's unconstitutional.

This has it's counterpart in the drunken baseball fan who expects the umpire to call nothing but balls when the home team is at bat, and nothing but strikes when the home team is pitching.
reply report
1. 61
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  A SKEWED INTERPRETATION OF THE 10TH AMENDMENT?!
  
  READ THE DAMNED THING:
  
  "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
  
  How could ANYONE take that to mean that "Congress can pass any law they want to"?!?! You're a madman, Doug.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You're in good company, Doug... the past 200 plus years of Supreme Court rulings are the results of madmen too
  reply report
  60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Poor Evan. I make him so angry he swears he won't ever respond to anything I write. Then I mention the 10th amendment, and he bites every time.
  
  The thing is, he's not totally wrong - just 100 years out of date. In 1800, if you asked a gentleman from Richmond traveling abroad his nationality, he would tell you 'Virginian'. The residents of the 13 original states thought of them as nations. In the Civil War, 65 years later, the various armies were all STATE militias. It wasn't til WWI that a national identity overtook the state identities. By the end of WWII, the concept of state sovereignty was all but dead. Supreme Court decisions support my theory. But once upon a time, Evan was right. Today, even the most conservative Supreme Court justice would disagree with Evan's view of the 10th.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  hence one of the reasons they call the Constitution a 'living document'
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  What utter baloney.
  
  the only thing that proves, is that SCOTUS is wholesale corrupt and useless.
  reply report
  66
  Greek Oneposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  the one does not negate the other
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  No, doug has to prove is idiocy... and he can't.
  
  First, it's written clear and straightforward. NOTHING is "ambiguous". Nothing.
  
  If he has trouble understanding it, it's just his lack of intellect.
  reply report
  77
  junkoposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I left you a message on AnnCee thread AWOL weholdthesetruths
  reply report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I'm utterly flabbergasted that the same people who demand that we "keep on educating our youth" are the same people who read the Constitution, and then say "it doesn't matter what is written down, what's important is what 9 jerk-nuggets SAY it means".
  
  It's utterly disgusting.
  reply report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I'm not wrong at all.
  
  Read the damned document.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  like saying black me were only part of a man, in terms of census...
  
  Live and die by SCOTUS' follies? NO thanks. I take the clear, unambiguous word of the Constitution every time.
  reply report
  60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Unfortunately, the Constitution is an ambiguous document. The Preamble lists as the first goal 'in order to form a more perfect union' while the 10TH amendment sets forth the opposite goal.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  LOL, you're truly a putz.
  
  Sorry, your intellect is not up to this conversation.
  reply report
  73
  Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Those comments dont seem very Constitutional!
  reply report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  There isn't anything ambiguous about it.
  
  And for any part you quote as being ambiguous, I'm sure that I could find even the most ardent supporters of a powerful national government arguing against whatever you say the document means.
  
  Hamilton, Adams, and Madison (all pro-powerful government) demanded that "general welfare" did not mean "congress can do anything".
  
  The document is NOT ambiguous, the 10th amendment makes it VERY clear.
  reply report
61
weseppersposted 13 years ago
From God. That's my point of view.
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Where do our freedoms come from?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Where do our freedoms come from?

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies