Is there a balance between Homeland Security and Individual Rights?
This was the topic of DD's Government paper tonight. She asked me what I thought and I said no. She agreed and said that she had just spend an hour going around in circles to say no. She was quite frustrated.
She did cite 2 specific times in American history when the balance had been shifted. The first being Lincoln's suspension on habeas corpus. DD noted the neccessity of Lincoln's decision to save America from itself. (The arrest of 13,000 "copperheads" did raise quite a few eyebrows about Lincoln's thirst for power.) Citing that history now reflects on Lincoln's wisdom and it's future ramifications.
Focusing on the shift of balance again, she recalled America's detention of Japanese-Americans in interment camps in the 1940's. A clear violation of individual rights without true justification.
I was impressed! Clearly, Darlin' Daughter is versed enough on American history and the constitution to make an eloquent response. She surprised me with her acceptance of squashing someone's first amendment rights. Her justification was if a person was purposely trying to rip the nation apart.
She's young and I told her I disagreed with her. DD was taken aback! (For never had I disagreed with her politically before!!) I told her we can disagree on this topic, and it is ok. She asked why I felt the why I did and I simply stated, "Because we may be closing the wrong mouth!"
She did cite 2 specific times in American history when the balance had been shifted. The first being Lincoln's suspension on habeas corpus. DD noted the neccessity of Lincoln's decision to save America from itself. (The arrest of 13,000 "copperheads" did raise quite a few eyebrows about Lincoln's thirst for power.) Citing that history now reflects on Lincoln's wisdom and it's future ramifications.
Focusing on the shift of balance again, she recalled America's detention of Japanese-Americans in interment camps in the 1940's. A clear violation of individual rights without true justification.
I was impressed! Clearly, Darlin' Daughter is versed enough on American history and the constitution to make an eloquent response. She surprised me with her acceptance of squashing someone's first amendment rights. Her justification was if a person was purposely trying to rip the nation apart.
She's young and I told her I disagreed with her. DD was taken aback! (For never had I disagreed with her politically before!!) I told her we can disagree on this topic, and it is ok. She asked why I felt the why I did and I simply stated, "Because we may be closing the wrong mouth!"
6 comments:
i believe fully in the power of free speech... even with all its pitfalls, it's the best!
it's not the right we are concerned about, it's the ability!
not sure i follow... what do you mean?
the balance comes as we pick and choose what laws are acceptable and what laws outweigh our rights. this will be ever changing. i wrote a paper on homeland security with specific reference to the USA PATRIOT Act. in my conclusion i stated the following...
Conclusion and Recommendations
It is recommended that every citizen study the implications of such a broad act as it could pertain to everyone alike. It has been shown that, though there is evidence of thwarting terrorism as described, the scope of the Patriot Act is broad enough to disrupt the lives of some innocent Americans as well. Because of this, there continues to be controversy and debate surrounding key aspects of the Patriot Act. It is clear, however, that the Act will continue to be renewed as these opposing views are hashed out by the people and their elected officials alike at all levels of government.
As Mitrano noted, “Security without freedom is no security at all, and it is in precisely this state that we will ruefully recognize that the terrorists have won after all” (Mitrano, 2003). There will certainly be more legal challenges as to the constitutional questions of the Act. As these cases occur and as their verdicts are stated, the Patriot Act will either expand or contract in scope accordingly. Perhaps revisions will not come about as quickly or frantically as the initial drafting of the Patriot Act itself, but it will inherently be revised as time goes on.
impressive conclusion... i concur!
i love your conclusion. we simply must be vigilant with our government with any broad-sweeping act. questioning our leaders not only empowers, it also humbles...not a bad thing at all!
Post a Comment