be willing to give up some constitutional rights when they believe they'll be more secure.
Or: Democrats are less likely to give up constitutional rights in return for security.
I would really like to have a discussion here-I'd be interested to hear differing viewpoints but would prefer to avoid name-calling.
2006-10-22 12:34:04 · 13 answers · asked by Middleclassandnotquiet 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither" - Benjamin Franklin-
2006-10-22 21:06:00 · answer #1 · answered by Johnathan F 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
To exercise a right implies that the privilege is being ( or has been ) taken away from you--other wise you would not be screaming about "your rights".
Republican Conservatives seldom plead for their rights because they usually are strong enough and responsible enough to prevent the loss. When a loss happens the Conservative gang can get along by substitution and adjustment.
That is not true for the weak dilly-dally Democrat liberals. Because they have a marginal sense of responsibility others take advantage of them while they are strumming their guitars and swinging their hips. Unfortunately, Dem-Liberals, like the proverbial grasshopper have no reserve force to keep them going and they tend to scream and moan a lot when things happen.
2006-10-22 20:33:24 · answer #2 · answered by Mr.Been there 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Someone responded with "In many States, the Govt doesn't even allow us to choose if we want to wear a seatbelt or not. Shouldn't that choice be up to the individual."
I have a tough time with these things because, as a nation, we're really bratty and spoiled. Most people would not wear a seatbelt simply because they don't feel like it, but then when they have a car accident and go flying through the windshield and break their body in half because they weren't wearing their seatbelt, they sue everybody and win. So I do think that certain laws are designed to protect us at many levels...and that's one of them.
As for Republicans? Oh boy. They simply don't care about the greater good...they care about what is good for THEMSELVES, what best fits THEIR PERSONAL BELIEFS, what best funds THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS...they are not HUMANITARIANS. They are blood suckers. So, President Bush being a perfect example, a Republican would CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION to reflect his personal religious beliefs, simply because they feel threatened somehow by something so small in the face of everything else. In short, Republicans are all about "No" (unless it suits themselves) and Democrats are all about "Yes" (unless it suits Republicans...) Ha.
2006-10-22 23:01:12 · answer #3 · answered by Slope 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes thats it. The thing is do we really need all these rights broken just for security. Are you so afraid that your willing to give up your freedom and allow the Govt to be in control, because your afraid there might be some attack one day. I'm a Libertarian, so I hope you know where I stand. I'm not going to allow the Govt to control my life. That isn't its place. Its there for protection not control. But it seems that many people give their brains and liberties in a heart beat, just because of fear.
Look at this:
In many States, the Govt doesn't even allow us to choose if we want to wear a seatbelt or not. Shouldn't that choice be up to the individual. We can't even cross certain parts of the street. Just these little things is what divides us from other countries. And I'm sorry, but if that isn't a beginning form of fascism, I don't know what is.
2006-10-22 19:42:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Actually the repuglicans are the ones that just scream when somebody threatens to take away their right to bare arms, but the writ of habias corpas is ok to give up. Strange people repuglicans are, no brains at all. How do the manage in life.
Democrats are liberals for the most part and tend to want to protect the constitution.
2006-10-22 19:41:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Conservatives are less worried about being "politically correct" ( i.e- profiling )than Liberals. Sometimes being PC needs to be put aside! In the post 9/11 age, is it terribly unreasonable to surrender small amount of our personal freedom in the name of public and national safety? An inconvenience? Yes! Necessary for our protection? Yes!
2006-10-22 20:05:26 · answer #6 · answered by Rob S 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think either democrats or republicans know what a "right" is, and I'm really sure that anyone that thinks they come from the Constitution is clueless and shouldn't be in charge of anything having to do with Freedom.
2006-10-22 19:41:23 · answer #7 · answered by open4one 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Both parties are willing to relinquish rights and securities for corporate campaign cash.
2006-10-22 19:49:40 · answer #8 · answered by ahab 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Republicans are crying wolf and the Democrats go to sleep.
2006-10-22 19:37:53 · answer #9 · answered by mimi 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
republicans will keep second amendment rights no matter how many gang shootings happen . democrats would give them up if no drivebys ever happened.
2006-10-22 19:43:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋