How Can Freedom Be Controlled

Freedom should be controlled, because lack of control would lead to chaos. When one’s freedom is exercised in a negative way, not controlling it could lead to the harm of others. It would be easy to think that freedom should be given to all; but giving maleficent people freedom would end badly. After fleeing to America, the Puritans set up an excessively strict system, with religion and government exceptionally tied together (Carnes, 1996). Without the control of the Church of England, the Puritan Church created a tyrannical system with greater oppression than the system they were escaping from. This resulted in the killing of innocent people and the harsh oppression many others. Clearly, to prevent iniquity, the liberty of others must be managed. Similarly, the racists irrationally antagonizing and harassing Rosaleen led to her getting beaten after she snapped at them (Kidd, 2002). Here,
the antagonists were exercising their freedom in a bad way, which, without police intervention, would’ve led to more severe injury or even death.
In this instance, independence being restricted was necessary in order to prevent harm, so it should be restrained. With freedom being controlled, a stronger union is formed. During the physical hardship of the young Bay Colony, strong bonds were needed to keep the colony afloat in the harsh conditions, but Mary Dyer and her friends’ ideas created a disparage that threatened their survival, and led to the rebels’ suffering and death (Carnes,1996). When the group of women exercised their new ideas, it created tension between them and the church’s members, splitting up the group that needed unified belief and loyalty to keep the area running under the harsh conditions of the land. Their spreading of blasphemy by Dyer and her group could’ve made the colony fall apart, showing that control of autonomy is needed to keep a group whole. Some might say that freedom can bring people together and result in
happiness, but many times, it then results in the splintering of relationships and more unfavorable aftermaths. Following May’s suicide due to Zach’s imprisonment, all her friends and family were left devastated (Kidd, 2002). If they had controlled her freedom and prevented her from drowning herself as a permanent solution to a temporary problem, they could’ve saved her from the mindset and helped her cope with the Zach’s arrest. It shattered the group momentarily, and left a negative impact on everyone for the rest of their lives. In order to prevent the fragmentation of family, there must be constraint. Earlier in the timeline, Deborah, Lily Owens’ mother, ran away from her newly started family and returned to her former home to get her daughter back, which resulted in Lily shooting her own mother on accident, ruining her future (Kidd, 2002). Her act of independence, running away from the family she irrevocably started, ended up in her tragic death, and a daughter with no real mother in her life. The results of her actions were more important and impactful than her temporary freedom, so liberty should have a restriction to control its negative repercussions. Clearly, due to the potentially negative and damaging repercussions of autonomy, it should be controlled.