Which is more important to you - National Security or First Amendment Rights.?

Question

Noting that both are important - which is most important to you and why?

Answer 1

without National Security there will be no rights

Answer 2

Silly kids!

Actually, it is the other way around - without rights, there is no nation, and hence no national security.

Just exactly what communication would the above answerers have Congress make laws prohibiting in violation of the 1st Amendment? How would that make national security better?

Later, once the cat is out of the bag, would you reinstate the 1st Amendment? Do you think it would be as though nothing ever happened, or could it be repealed as expedient whenever "necessary" from then on as precedent is already set?

Also, remember that 1st Amendment covers a lot more besides speech:

Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

You would lose the right of freedom of religion, to have the government listen to you or even to protest at all, or to have a free press, including the freedom you enjoy on the internet.

All that is very specific, and people would really trade it for some vague notion of "national security"?

Sad sad sad - I am up late but I will surely cry myself to sleep tonight when I get there!

Answer 3

First Amendment Rights.

Answer 4

"A nicely regulated military, being had to the protection of a loose state, the main appropriate of the folk to maintain and undergo palms, shall no longer be infringed." the 2d substitute performs 3 significant roles contained in the protection of a loose state. a million. the 1st 10 amendments are common because of the fact the bill of Rights. the main appropriate to undergo palms is the only impressive assure of those rights because it supplies the folk the means to oppose tyrany 2 An armed inhabitants makes invasion by using a foreign places means much less probably because of the fact the folk themselves be able of protection. 3. The framers of the form have been worried that the Republic in some unspecified time contained sooner or later contained sooner or later grow to be a tyranny. It became recognized contained in the assertion of Independance that the folk have a impressive to overthrow oppressive dictatorial governments. for people who think of there is no % for a citizen to very own a military type weapon the are ignoring the completed meaning of the 2nd substitute. It has no longer something to do with looking!

Answer 5

Without a doubt, the First Amendment. Nothing beats my right to free speech or my right to practice the religion of my choice. Especially national security. Totalitarian governments are instituted and freedoms are denied all over the world and in history in the name of national security. From Genghis Khan to Alexander the Great to Adolph Hitler to George Bush & Dick Chaney, basic human freedoms are swept aside and whole nations tortured and imprisoned.

Answer 6

Freedom of Speech means your are free to say whatever you want, but you are also responsible for what you say. If a reporter reveals a top secret gov't program it is their right to do so. However, it is also illegal so they are responsible for the jail time they receive. Both are important, but people should have some common sense as to what they want to talk about or report. If this was a game of poker, would you want someone telling the other people what you had in your hand?

Answer 7

First Amendment Rights. Benjamin Franklin said , "Those who are willing to give up freedom in the name of security, deserve neither". I must say I agree whole-heartedly with the founding fathers because they knew the dangers of replacing our beloved Republic with a "Socialist Democracy".

Answer 8

The first amendment is more important to me. Many presidents have used 'national security' as a justification to do whatever they wanted to do in the first place, usually arrogating some unconstitutional power to themselves or their administrations. We went all through this with Nixon, and it's just long enough ago that most people are too young to remember. Giving the government unlimited power for 'investigation', surrendering our liberty to partisan thugs, doesn't make us safer, in fact quite the opposite.

Answer 9

National Security first...for without our country being being free, the rights we enjoy would mean nothing....we wouldn't have them.
I understand that certain precautions must be taken to insure the freedoms we enjoy. That being said, it saddens me when people in power abuse their position and seem to forget why they are where they are. It is inevitable that those who mean well, find themselves on a slippery slope once they start accepting 'bribes' or other forms of..'help'...the concept of "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours." gets warped.
I have no problem with cameras being put up on corners, as I am not one to break laws.....I accept that when I am speeding, I risk a ticket...(course if the officer is happy w/ just issuing me a warning I certainly will not complain)
If that camera happens to catch more then someone speeding, say someone who runs the light and kills a family...so be it.....I think that is a good.
If I have to suffer thru waiting in lines at the airport that put the lines at the DMV to shame, so be it if it means I will be safer in the air.
It's RUDENESS I can do without.
Power and position do NOT give people the right to walk all over someone they are supposed to be serving. Of course there are times when it can not be helped.....as I mentioned in another post somewhere on cops being rude in a certain circumstance.
So, yes, National Security is more important, cuz w/o it, we stand to lose what we enjoy.

Answer 10

first amendment

the terrorists can have the country if we loose the first amendment, the 2nd (right to keep and bear arms) will certainly follow right behind #1

then we ARE the nazi germany or the soviet union