FaunaClassifieds - View Single Post

08-28-2003, 10:27 PM

It is a fine line upon which a government of fallable people must try to balance themselves as they attempt to keep innocent civilians safe without violating their civil liberties.

Think about a small child, for a moment. On the one hand, a parent wants that child to experience as much as possible so as to grow into a well-rounded adult, with all of the understanding and knowledge necessary to be successful. On the other, the same parent realizes that there is a whole world full of creeps: murderers, rapists, drug pushers, gangs, and donw right lousy people out there to do great harm to your precious baby. So what do you do? Just turn them loose and hope for the best? Lock them in their rooms until they're 30? SOmewhere in between, obviously, but where do you draw the line on each individual instance?

We, the collective US society, are not children of the government with no ability to choose for ourselves, but the government IS responsible for the safety of the whole. There are already those blaming the President for not doing more to prevent 9-11. Well, excuse me, but you simply cannot have it both ways, and trying to do so sounds a lot like the teenager that wants to be safe at home with all of the liberties of being out on his own.

That being said, I think the administration, including President Bush and Atty. Gen. Ashcroft, are doing just fine. Are there instances in which I wish other actions would have been taken? Of course. However, I, for one, am thankful that none of the other options with which we were faced in 2000 are in that oval office right now.

As to the purposes and intents of the Bill of Rights, well, I'll just briefly point out that there were those of our Founding Fathers who did not want the Bill of Rights included. Why? Because they were afraid that some day scholars would want to infer that the rights of the people were LIMITED to those listed rights, instead of understanding that the rights listed were only those deemed most important to protect at the time. The rest of the right of the people and the individual States were preserved fromt he Federal government by way of the 9th and 10th amendments to try to avoid such misunderstandings.

08-28-2003, 10:27 PM	#6
Darin Chappell	It is a fine line upon which a government of fallable people must try to balance themselves as they attempt to keep innocent civilians safe without violating their civil liberties. Think about a small child, for a moment. On the one hand, a parent wants that child to experience as much as possible so as to grow into a well-rounded adult, with all of the understanding and knowledge necessary to be successful. On the other, the same parent realizes that there is a whole world full of creeps: murderers, rapists, drug pushers, gangs, and donw right lousy people out there to do great harm to your precious baby. So what do you do? Just turn them loose and hope for the best? Lock them in their rooms until they're 30? SOmewhere in between, obviously, but where do you draw the line on each individual instance? We, the collective US society, are not children of the government with no ability to choose for ourselves, but the government IS responsible for the safety of the whole. There are already those blaming the President for not doing more to prevent 9-11. Well, excuse me, but you simply cannot have it both ways, and trying to do so sounds a lot like the teenager that wants to be safe at home with all of the liberties of being out on his own. That being said, I think the administration, including President Bush and Atty. Gen. Ashcroft, are doing just fine. Are there instances in which I wish other actions would have been taken? Of course. However, I, for one, am thankful that none of the other options with which we were faced in 2000 are in that oval office right now. As to the purposes and intents of the Bill of Rights, well, I'll just briefly point out that there were those of our Founding Fathers who did not want the Bill of Rights included. Why? Because they were afraid that some day scholars would want to infer that the rights of the people were LIMITED to those listed rights, instead of understanding that the rights listed were only those deemed most important to protect at the time. The rest of the right of the people and the individual States were preserved fromt he Federal government by way of the 9th and 10th amendments to try to avoid such misunderstandings.