Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Phred]
    #2322264 -

And what new power over you has the US government seized? What can you not do in the US today that you could do pre September 11? Which actions of yours which you used to exercise freely three years ago do you miss the most?

um. I never said anything about the government actually preventing me from doing something... but there is no doubt that our liberty and our privacy rights are being curtailed. see the patriot act and patriot act II.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2322830 -

Right, you are! Just because you are I do not choose to exercise a particular right does not mean that we should ignore it's demise at the hands of a government increasingly hostile to personal liberty. If present trends continue, there may come a day when people Pinky has debated on these boards will be stripped of their citizenship so they can be more easily dealt with under the guise of 'combating terrorism.' People such as myself who have publicly endorsed organizations and activities (outside of this BBS) which have attempted to bring to light the dangers of an increasingly powerful state, people who bear witness that the so-called 'phantoms of lost liberty' are not phantoms at all but ominous historical occurrences which signal the death knell of 'The American Experiment.'


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: ]
    #2323909 -

what i mean is that liberty and security are essentially the same thing.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: ]
    #2324603 -

they could (should?) be the same thing, but I think most of the time you gain one at the expense of the other.

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security"

-Benjamin Franklin

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2325042 -

what is security really? it's the ability to live a peaceful life free from forceful intrusion. is not liberty the same thing?

you cannot give up one at the expense of the other... you will either gain or lose both.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Post deleted by Anno [Re: afoaf]
    #2325974 -


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: ]
    #2326076 -

actually the US is a democratic republic..

and.. ya.. trading liberty for safety is bunk. see: airline rapage before they let you on a plane, just in case. wtf is that all about. that's totally idiotic.


But then again, there's no way a few people with boxcutters should ever have been able to hold 80 people docile while they hijack a plane anyway. i'd say that's a good testament to the US spirit nowadays..


--------------------
i finally got around to making a sig
revel in its glory and quake in fear at its might
grar.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Mushmonkey]
    #2327397 -

Quote:
actually the US is a democratic republic..



Incorrect. It's a constitutionally limited republic.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: afoaf]
    #2328239 -

afoaf writes:

Further, Bill Gates and his bottomless
pit of cash can greatly affect the strength
of his chosen candidate's campaign through
cash donations whereas my paypal'd $50
to my candidate probably won't.

Uh huh. Tell that to Howard Dean. He had more bucks by far than the other Dem candidates. Sure worked for him, didn't it?

And what you see as the persecution of christians
I see as the proper defeat of christian activism
in both the private and public sector.

You are of course free to view it that way. What I don't see is how you can claim their activities have anything to do with a perceived weakening of the separation of church and state. It has nothing to do with the government one way or the other. And whenever the government (i.e. courts) does get dragged into it, the Christians always lose.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2328267 -

infidelGOD writes:

I never said anything about the government actually preventing me from doing something... but there is no doubt that our liberty and our privacy rights are being curtailed.

By definition, to curtail someone's liberty means to prevent them from taking some action they were free to take previously -- before the curtailment was implemented.

If none of the curtailment has yet affected you personally, that's okay. Give me an example of something any American was free to do prior to 9-11 that they are no longer free to do today.

Moving on to the privacy part of things --

What part of your life history were you able to conceal from the government prior to 9-11 that you can no longer conceal today? Again, if you can't think of any example that fits you personally, give me an example which fits some hypothetical American other than yourself.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Phred]
    #2331256 -

By definition, to curtail someone's liberty means to prevent them from taking some action they were free to take previously -- before the curtailment was implemented.

If none of the curtailment has yet affected you personally, that's okay. Give me an example of something any American was free to do prior to 9-11 that they are no longer free to do today.

I understand if it's not obvious to you. but our liberties ARE being curtailed, sometimes in small and subtle ways. and even though it probably doesn't effect most of us personally, it's still cause for alarm. it should be cause for alarm for anyone who loves liberty. and here's a specific example: let's say an innocent American citizen is falsely accused of being a terrorist. he would be prevented from contacting a lawyer and properly defending himself against false allegations. he would be denied his constitutional right to due process.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2333498 -

infidelGOD writes:

and here's a specific example: let's say an innocent American citizen is falsely accused of being a terrorist. he would be prevented from contacting a lawyer and properly defending himself against false allegations. he would be denied his constitutional right to due process.

I knew you could do it.

Out of curiosity, could you point me to the section of the Patriot Act (I'm presuming you refer to the Patriot Act here -- if not then point me to the relevant section of whichever other legislation provides for this) which specifies that Americans accused of terrorist acts are prohibited from retaining legal counsel? Thanks.

I'm not saying you're incorrect on this point, but I do find it odd that Americans accused of terrorism would be denied legal counsel when non-Americans (i.e. Mohammed Moussaoui) are not. That can't be right.

Okay -- you've answered one of my questions. Presumably your answer was an accurate one. Let's move on to the other.

Why are those in charge of the American government anxious to seize an excuse to restrict the liberties of Americans? Is it for financial gain? Psychological gain? Symbolic gain? What is their motive, in other words.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Phred]
    #2333578 -

Out of curiosity, could you point me to the section of the Patriot Act (I'm presuming you refer to the Patriot Act here

I'm not necessarily refering to the patriot act, or any specific legislation. in that example I'm referring to the actions of the government. you said "Give me an example of something any American was free to do prior to 9-11 that they are no longer free to do today."

I gave an example of it. I don't recall Americans routinely being held without charge and denied due process before 9-11. do you? this probably doesn't mean much to you since it doesn't affect you, but this is just one example of a significant change taking place. it's no secret to anyone paying attention. I'm not debating the neccesity of this change. just stating the facts.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2333604 -

infidelGOD writes:

I don't recall Americans routinely being held without charge and denied due process before 9-11. do you?

No, I don't recall that.

Are you saying that now they are? I call you on that. I want an example.

If you can't provide an actual real life example, or provide the changed legislation which allows such an example to occur, then all you are doing is claiming with no backup whatsoever that it might happen some day. Well, aliens from the Tau Ceti star system might land in Boston some day, too, but that has nothing to do with 9-11 either.

this probably doesn't mean much to you since it doesn't affect you, but this is just one example of a significant change taking place.

What "example" do you mean? Until you back up your claim that Americans can now (post 9-11) be denied legal counsel if charged with certain things when before 9-11 they could not, you have provided no example, you have just been flapping your gums.

What "significant change" do you mean? A significant change in the mindset of some sherriff out in Bumwad Wyoming? Either the law has been changed to allow the detention of Americans without legal representation or it hasn't. If it has, you should be able to prove it has. If it hasn't, then all your talk of "significant change" is legally irrelevant.

it's no secret to anyone paying attention.

Then since you have been paying attention, you should be able to cite the relevant legislation which deprives an American charged with terrorism the right to legal representation. I mean, it's no secret, right?

I'm not debating the neccesity of this change. just stating the facts.

Source, please.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Phred]
    #2333622 -

http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/reports/docs/Civil_Liberities.pdf

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2333645 -

Okay. I downloaded that 55k pdf file. I presume you read it, or you wouldn't have linked it.

Where does it quote (or even refer to) legislation specifying that an American suspected of being a terrorist is to be denied legal reprsentation? Maybe it's in there somewhere, but I can't for the life of me find it.

Help me out.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Why we may never regain the liberties that we've lost RadioActiveSlug 824 7 04/11/03 08:11 AM
by PsiloKitten
* Positive & Negative Liberties in Three Dimensions lonestar2004 1,186 5 06/20/05 09:32 PM
by Phred
* The Founding Fathers and Christianity TheOneYouKnow 1,155 9 03/15/04 11:09 AM
by afoaf
* Confidential Passenger Data Used for Air Security Project daussaulit 778 1 01/21/04 06:50 PM
by Annapurna1
* Hitler V Saddam
( 1 2 all )		 germin8tionn8ion 4,487 28 07/03/04 09:20 AM
by Ed1
* Cato Policy Analysis - Bush's National Security Strategy afoaf 694 5 11/05/03 03:02 PM
by Rono
* The September 11 X-Files wingnutx 1,591 9 08/17/03 01:34 AM
by BleaK
* Christians And Conservatives Can Go Back To Sleep Now, Because The Boogey Man Is Gone
( 1 2 all )		 ekomstop 2,064 22 11/09/04 06:26 PM
by Great_Satan

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
1,811 topic views. 6 members, 1 guests and 243 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.034 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 17 queries.