I am ok with losing my right to privacy so that the government can easily find terrorists, and very rarily are any other rights lost. The responsible thing to do in any situation involving radicals who want to take civilian lifes is to pitch in any way they can to aid there government.
The government gives us many other ways for privacy this is for us to live a happy and express our feelings, but look at 9/11. A lot of people died, were talking about thousands. If you dont agree you have something to hide like watching pornography. So which one do you choose life or privacy?
In the USA our constitution defends our most important rights. I would be willing to give up some simple freedoms if it meant that on a larger scale, more people would be protected. In this country we are protected from the major injustices of our freedom, we should all be willing to make small changes for the greater good.
Benjamin Franklin said a man who gives freedom in exchange for safety deserves neither. My feelings exactly. Terrorism is not new but liberties have been hard fought and paid in blood. To me as an American the thing I value most is not the standard of living or comforts but the heritage of fighting for freedom. I've inherited more than many people have lost. To me it's an insult to be the first generation of Americans to be less free the any of the one's before. Terrorist can take our lives but only we can give away our freedoms. IF terrorists attack those who agree to the question can sign up for jail, the rest of us can sign up to fight.
If we gave up our privacy to combat terrorism they would win against us. They want us to feel insecure and uneasy, so taking away our privacy would make them more confident in what they do. Tell me if I'm wrong there have only had 7 terror attacks in the past 40 years so thats a 0.5% chance of being involved in a terror attack, would you give up your privacy for 0.5% chance of being involved when you will be being monitored 100% of the time.
When we take a look at who has historically lost their civil liberties in the times of war, it has always been minority groups for instance in WW2 when the Japanese were taken into internment camps and had their privacy completely taken away as well as their religious freedoms and so much more because the government perceived it as necessary in order to 'win the war' against Japan. Let's take a look at the war on terror after WW2 several surveillance programs were implemented in order to prevent terror; however, most of these programs targetted people who were affiliated with the Islamic or Muslim culture and as a result, Islamophobia became a thing as well as xenophobia became present in modern culture. Not to mention the infamous detention center, Guantanamo Bay, that have no civil liberties once so ever to any person deemed as a prisoner of war which, sadly, were mostly Islamic or Muslim affiliates.
After giving up this right, what other rights will follow? Will we eventually fall back to the cruel ways humanity once was a long long time ago? I surely hope not. We created these rights because they are needed, by everyone and thus everyone deserves to have them. For me as a Dutch citizen, it's easier to have this opinion, there are not a lot of conflicts here, luckily. So, I do understand that people from other places around the world might think otherwise.
"Anyone who would give up liberty for security deserves neither and will loose both." Ben Franklin.
There is nothing more precious and worth fighting for than our civil liberties. Once you give up even just a little, it is unlikely you will ever get them back. We as a nation have to bring back a sense of personal and civic responsibility. I work with the government, they care about their Job, they don't care about the individual. And the individual is all that matters when it is you.
If giving up my civil liberties *really* did help to fight terrorism, I might have considered it. But, unfortunately, that's not how things work. I don't trust that terrorism or crime is the real reason behind limiting my freedom. But even if it was, criminals and corrupt politicians always find a way around the rules. In the end, the people who're hurt the most are the lawful citizens. It might be able to stop petty small-scale crime sometimes at best, but not enough to justify the negative of the limitation of our freedom.
Isaiah 54:14 In righteousness shalt thou be established: thou shalt be far from oppression; for thou shalt not fear: and from terror; for it shall not come near thee.
Ezekiel 2818 Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee. 19 All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never [shalt] thou [be] any more.
Preventing terror is important. However, our liberty are important too. Giving up civil liberty is not only the way to make a safer country. On the other hand, we can give up other things like money or resoarces and make a safer world. Therefore, because civil liberty is important, I disagree to this motion.