Is it more important to you to live in a country with more security or more individual rights and freedoms?

Answer 1

When you're country is in a war there will always be some restrictions because of security. Getting a balance between security and rights and freedoms is a delicate balancing act. Losing some freedoms and rights temporarily to win a war or combat an immediate terrorist threat is acceptable. But I want my security forces, the military to have a free hand in doing what they have to do to end the war or crisis quickly and have any restrictions put in place to be removed. Right now, however, the U.S. military is forced to fight with one hand tied behind their back. You can't be the nice guy and win the war or stop terrorists. They only perceive you as weak.

Answer 2

There is a tipping point. Complete Anarchy, for instance, means that the government infringes on none of your rights and freedoms (cause it doesn't exist) - but, your neighbors /can/ infringe on those rights and freedoms by force if they feel like it, as there's no rule of law to stop them.

I definitely prefer to err on the side of individual freedom, though. You need just enough government to maintain the rule of law and avoid actual anarchy.

Answer 3

Individual rights and freedoms. You know, as laid out in the Constitution (assuming we're talking about the US here.)

Answer 4

Ideally I'd like to live in a country with an equal amount of both. Everything is a matter of degree.

Answer 5

I live in a country that has both, Greece. BEcause being deeply democratic and free, we also respect everyone else's freedom, so no-one has any reason to want to harm us.

Answer 6

Both. They are not mutually exclusive.

Answer 7

LIBERTY!