Yes. When those rights threaten to make the nation vulnerable to attack from those who can bring down our nation. For instance I believe it is appropriate to relax the requirements for placing wire taps on phones. When the threat has been controlled then it is appropriate to return to a more strict protection of these rights. This has happened in our nations past as in WWII. This was critical to our nation's survival and after the threat was neutralized it was no longer necessary
2006-10-19 06:21:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by yagman 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Basically the constitution is just a piece of paper, the words on it can be set aside at any time for the safety of the body politic. Republicans and Democrats have in the past set it aside completely to further their own agendas. In times of war, civil and social unrest, and direct threat to the preservation of the USA they can be discarded. Also when Marshall Law is enacted, no rights are given or guaranteed under that circumstance.
2006-10-19 06:30:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by PDK 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good question?
I 'm confused about it too, there's the right to privacy, and then there's the patriot act which conflicts each other why is that?
So you have privacy but when the government wants to check up on you you don't
2006-10-19 06:18:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by Ankit 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Whenever the Conservatives want to, apparently. After all, anyone who's not with them is against them, and they have no problem calling the rest of us "traitors." They haven't talked about camps or a master race... yet... although the immigration debate hints of it.
2006-10-19 06:22:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by kent_shakespear 7
·
0⤊
2⤋