In difficult times, should the government take away civil liberties and basic rights to ensure the safety of the United States?

Asked by: brokenx
  • No responses have been submitted.
  • Curious to debate .

    Is the reference the people of the United States or secure the national identity and structure. While I would argue taking away peoples civil liberties is a pretty broad spectrum and depending on the issue could be ethnic, religious, political, or more. During the Mcarthy Era for example the government targeted people who were Communist even if they didn't advocate the Soviet Union, Racially profiled people, and even hurt middle-income communities by allowing damaging laws against unions. I would strongly disagree with any action imposing the free-minded and openness, however if you were to raise the question of a crisis disaster where the nation is likely to collapse to turmoil and mass-disarray. I think the nation isn't worth saving to begin with since it's sacrificing the very it was made from for preservation, only the deepest Nationalist could ever justify something. At that point I imagine the United States national emblem would be a hawk carrying a bundle of rods and an axe - or in other-words a literal fascist state and likely destroy itself by taking these actions to begin with by raising massive unrest...

  • This tends to go badly.

    This could allow for a dictatorship or something very close. I do believe that certain liberties may need to be restricted in the interest of Safety. However, given the United State's geological and military position I believe the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution must be maintained no matter the situation and I do not believe there is any reason they cannot be maintained.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.