How much of your rights are you willing to sacrifise for more security against "teriorism"? B sure to keep future generations in mind.
2006-08-09 19:44:17 · 8 answers · asked by RL 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
When you ask that question, it makes me think of all those movies that you see. People having their id implanted in them so the government knows where they are at every moment. Curfews, soldiers marching the streets. Gates at every road so you have to ask permission to leave.
It scares me to think that one day that's how it's going to be.
I watched on the news today that 20 terrorists were caught at which airport i don't recall, but they asked all passengers and potential passengers to not come to the airport unless they absolutely had to fly today.
What does that say right there?
Already we have lost our freedom to fly safely, use subways safely, most people already live in fear. I think it will be inevitable down the road to retain any of rights to some degree.
I think what rights we have right now we will be able to retain as will our kids, but I think all that will go downhill as the generations go. I like the rights I have right now, I don't really feel threatened, I think Bush is the biggest threat right now as I don't feel he should've sent our troops out for something that overall doesn't concern us. I applaud them for trying to help, and I think they have, but at too great a cost.
2006-08-10 14:29:50 · answer #1 · answered by ~SSIRREN~ 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The problem is that freedom and security shouldn't be played out against each other as if they should cancel each other out. So, my first reaction is to ask "why freedom v. security?" Why not "freddom v. bigotry?" This latter militates against fundamentalism of all sorts: Muslim, Christian, Zionist, Hinduist, etc.
Strengthen your freedom and you'll be secured. This is the main reason why the West is so attractive. With the "freedom v. security" language we're conceding defeat and telling Muslim extremists that they're right. They've had security for centuries.
Is that what we want?
2006-08-10 07:43:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Without security there is no freedom. Without freedom there is no need for security except for those in control. I would rather have the government listen to my daughters phone calls, than have her killed by a terrorist while someone was watching out for her civil rights. We have gotten so careful not to infringe on the "civil rights" of criminals that our children can't go play outside alone anymore. I see victims rights advocates to help people after they have become a victim. How about alittle more security so they aren't a victim?
2006-08-10 02:59:13 · answer #3 · answered by mark g 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Being secure make freedom possible, one could argue. But Freedom always takes precedence.
2006-08-10 02:49:55 · answer #4 · answered by rayhanks2260 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Zero. If you give up freedom for security, you deserve neither.
2006-08-10 03:02:59 · answer #5 · answered by aofive 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Agree with "aofive". Ben Franklin must have been one hell of a wise man.
2006-08-10 03:32:52 · answer #6 · answered by goldensongod 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I completely agree with rayhanks.
2006-08-10 03:00:20 · answer #7 · answered by frogspeaceflower 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What terrorism? You mean the terrorism set up by our government?
2006-08-10 02:50:12 · answer #8 · answered by Ohay 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋