I'm in a debate. Need info. "Homeland security is more important than..."?

Question

The topic is "Homeland security is more important than the protection of civil liberties." I could use information for either the proposition or the opposition. Thanks in advance.

Answer 1

There is no question that Homeland security is more important than Civil Liberties. If you loose your homeland, you loose everything including civil liberty.
Lets say that America gets very very slack in its defense, while Iran builds up a very powerful armed force, with nuclear bombs. They attack a weak America and take over the country. Where would your civil liberty be then ?

Answer 2

This whole issue on homeland security was a ruse and a smoke screen to put us behind the eight ball in fear? and the reason is Government Control, not just ours but others. This homeland thing is a joke, Locking the barn door after the cows have gone?
What a roping wrangler Bush is Yahoo Mountain Dew, ride em cowboy? No way is it more important than civil liberties? eh?
That is what this war is about? Freedom? Duh? That is why it is pathetic how we have people saying we hope that America loses the war, and comes home? What is that a patriot? No it is an idiot. Because we were put in harms way and awoke the sleeping dragon we are forced to have this homeland thing and the war. The idea was when Bush took the platform front and center he boasted how he was going to get rid of the EOE programs and the Gay rights? Look it up in his speeches????
He was determined to succeed in taking away the voice of the people? He had no intention of supporting the rights of others, especially minority groups. He made fun of it as well. On one hand it does get ridiculous with the media jumping on every cause, and the lawyers suing at the drop of the hat? He played on that issue because the media played it like a broken record and American Born people were sick and tired of multi-million dollar law suits given to foreigners as well? The problem is the lawyers and the Media? In combination they are turning a good thing to a bad, for the reasons of profit than justice? Just like malpractice suits in medicine? Why does a handicapped child need 40 million dollars? Or anyone for that matter? Why are they worth more than someone else. So now he is proposing the statement in his last speech to put a cap on the malpractice suits and that is wrong, because it is too late? The idea is pass a good health policy first and then we address the malpractice issues because for the most part improper care comes mostly from the understaffing in the medical facilities, and the insurance companies putting a cap on how much to spend on one human life? They disqualify most every existing disease today and refuse the medicines to the patients for high blood pressure which should be over the counter by now. Now youv'e got the pharmeceutical companies that are greedy and there is another battle, so yeah he is stomping all around on the civil liberties and then is essence killing us with the lack of medical care as well, and giving trillions to get our soldiers killed and make money for his friends in the arms businesses, and oil. There you have it in a nut shell I think Duh? Bubba Dubya has got to go!

Answer 3

In Germany, Summer of 1934, an act of law temporarily vested all treaties and foreign policy decisions into Hitler's hands....as a temporary measure in response to a temporary national emergency. This is how tyranny begins. The moment we lose basic civil liberties we surrender the very things that supposedly characterizes America as a land of the free. If the President can declare Americans no longer have habeas corpus protections, as a temporary emergency then we are basically living prisoners, sacraficing out liberty on the alter of homeland security. If we have to become fascists then the terrorists have won.

Answer 4

Homeland security is an excuse to build the empire even bigger than it is. Forget about any notion you have of civil liberties as you are property of the state and you better not leave home without your serial number (it's printed on your DL or state ID card). If you even think you are safe and secure in your home just check out the ERT and SWAT team raids. Even your dog can't protect you as they shoot first if he as much as barks. You own nothing and are allowed to use it provided you pay the rental fee called a tax.

Answer 5

The best quote I can imagine came from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson. He said the U.S. Constitution is not a suicide pact.

To quote Wikipedia: ""The Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a rhetorical phrase in American political and legal discourse. The phrase expresses the belief that constitutional restrictions on governmental power must give way to urgent practical needs. It is most often attributed to Abraham Lincoln, as a response to charges that he was violating the United States Constitution by suspending habeas corpus during the American Civil War. Although the phrase echoes statements made by Lincoln, and although the sentiment has been enunciated several other times in American history, the precise phrase "suicide pact" was first used by Justice Robert H. Jackson in his dissenting opinion in Terminiello v. Chicago, a 1949 free speech case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court."

Let's imagine it's the height of the Cold War, and our radar tracks 20 Soviet warships steaming fast towards the U.S. We have a Russian detained for questioning who blurts out, "You capitalist pigs will all soon die. Those warships have nuclear tipped missiles, and only I and select members of the Kremlin know the code to disarm the missiles".

Under these circumstances, do you honestly believe that the U.S. should commit suicide by not trying torture as a last resort? While some people say that torture is not an effective means, many in our military laugh at that assertion, since they have extracted vital information countless times. Water-boarding is quite effective, and leaves no permanent damage.

In times of war (and the war against terrorism is every bit as serious and dangerous as the traditional type of war), some civil liberties have been suspended, often for good reason. Abraham Lincoln suspended the right of Habeus Corpus during the Civil War. How many people say that was a bad decision?

In the case of our present Department of Homeland Security, no one, not even the most rabid Liberal, seems to be able to find even one innocent person who has been in any way harmed by the Patriot Act.

The first responsibility of a President is to protect the nation against foreign attack. Sometimes, that requires that tough decisions be made. However, any decision that prevents catastrophic damage to our country is the right one. Sometimes we don't have the luxury of living up to our ideals. Sometimes, reality forces us to compromise, and once we are over the crisis, we strive once again to reach those lofty, noble ideals that are the reason we fought so hard in the first place.

But let's never be so stupid that we let those noble ideals force us to commit national suicide. People are often afraid to temporarily relinquish any rights, even for good cause, because they fear some Sci-Fi world of the future where all rights have been usurped by some omni-present, totally powerful government. Those Sci-Fi scenarios are fiction. We are living in the real world, and we have to act like grown ups sometimes, not some silly scared kid watching a Sci-Fi flick on tv.

Answer 6

Well, without homeland security, the term "Civil Liberties" would not exist. Hope that helps.

Answer 7

Homeland security is NOT more important thatn civil liberties.

They are equally important and we must not forget our civil liberties nor throw them aside.

If we degrade or eliminate them, we are subverting the founding principles of our country.

If we allow the principles of our country to be done away with, those who mean us harm have won.

We've heard many times that "they hate us for our freedoms, our principles, etc."

Answer 8

You need to define both terms first. Neither, broadly, is more important than the other. Security without freedom is just another form of tyranny. Freedom without security cannot be preserved. The problem is in defining the reasonable balance and limits of both.

The question then becomes, "What limits of freedom are necessary, or acceptable, in the maintenance of security?" It sounds to me like whoever set up this debate either didn't think it through, or (I think more likely) has an agenda, and has set you up to lose.

Answer 9

"Civil liberties" means which you have a civilization that could have liberties in it. in case you do not have fatherland protection, how are you going to guard your civilization so which you would be able to freely sit down around and argue whether you're loose or no longer? that's not debatable except you're only lost in each and every of the words. examine the words and notice what they're asserting. in case you do not have fatherland protection, how are you able to've ANY style of liberties, or the rest?? God Bless you.

Answer 10

Nothing (legally speaking) is more important than the rights of the people. Inalienable rights is how they are often refered to. Meaning that nothing comes before this. All humans are entitled to this. etc.

Mans sense of justice allows government to exist mans sens of injustice requires it. The reason that Homeland Security or any other government entity will never be more important than the right of the individual is that people are corrupt; therefore government is corrupt; therefore government will corrupt what it claims to protect by way of disenfranchisement.