Today's quotes... compare and contrast.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (USA Founding Father)
"Sometimes we may have to modify some of our own freedoms in the short term in order to prevent their misuse by those who oppose our fundamental values and would destroy all of our freedoms." -- John Reid (UK Home Secretary)
(second quote spotted in
wechsler's journal)
"Sometimes we may have to modify some of our own freedoms in the short term in order to prevent their misuse by those who oppose our fundamental values and would destroy all of our freedoms." -- John Reid (UK Home Secretary)
(second quote spotted in
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
So there must be some liberties that are essential. (And, as a corollary, some liberties that are not - presumably divided into those that are desirable and those that are undesirable).
I'm not sure that it's clear which liberties fall into what categories. And I don't think there's a clear consensus in our society on this question. I'd suggest that's where many of the problems lie. Particularly where liberties collide.
For example : Sinners and Winners man. Does his right of free speech and religion override my right to go about my business without being yelled at, insulted and generally abused by a twit with a megaphone?
no subject
no subject
The bigger insult is that to get to the US from any other country, you have to go thru a 2nd screening. That should be considered an insult to the hosting countries, and to any American. Maybe the Americans (with the Blue passports) should just be given a separate line, and the visitors can be treated like non-citizens (illigal search and seisure).
Cars still kill more people than planes.
no subject
Of course we've been heading down this route for years (since Michael Howard was Home Secretary) with all criminal law - Howard was sneaky enough to hide his civil liberty infringements in byelaws and small reversals of the burden of proof etc. Only people that know evidence law really ever see them and they seem too minor to make a big deal about. Now New Labour decide to go in with bulldozers and make lots of new and silly laws and unsuprisingly seem shocked when even more unsuprisingly lots of people say "oi, wait a minute".
*shakes head* all a big mess.
no subject