Posted on 09/04/2002 2:21:46 PM PDT by Captain Shady
Freedom devalued Poll shows that many Americans no longer cherish their rights
Congress resumed its discussions in Washington this week on a host of important issues: homeland security, whether the United States should invade Iraq, budget priorities, health care and boosting the economy.
But none of those issues and no foreign enemy poses a greater danger to this country and the way of life we have enjoyed than the attitudes expressed in a poll released last week.
The poll shows that half of Americans think that the First Amendment goes too far in guaranteeing the rights it protects.
That number has more than doubled in the past two years. Researchers have tied the change to security concerns surrounding the war on terrorism and the way the media covered the 2000 presidential election.
The annual poll is done by the Center for Survey Research & Analysis at the University of Connecticut for the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center.
Researchers found that:
“More than four in 10 said they would limit the academic freedom of professors and bar criticism of government military policy.”
“About half of those surveyed said government should be able to monitor religious groups in the interest of national security, even if that means infringing upon religious freedom.”
“Forty-two percent of respondents said the press in America has too much freedom to do what it wants.”
Are Americans willing to trade freedom for security, even the most cherished freedoms of the First Amendment?
They will be if they see these freedoms as applying only to others. And they will if they think the restrictions they favor will only apply to others.
We must remember that the First Amendment, indeed the entire Bill of Rights, protects our freedoms — yours personally.
There is no way to impinge on someone else’s religious freedom without giving up your own. There is no way to limit someone else’s ability to speak his mind without giving up your ability to sound off. There is no way to restrict the news media without giving up your right to know what’s happening.
The First Amendment and other constitutional protections are not just for others. They protect us. Their provisions and our forefathers’ willingness to fight for their preservation have made this country the beacon for freedom that it is.
We cannot now allow complacency and fear to convince us to part with those cherished values that are hated by much of the world and envied by the rest.
Americans are planning to commemorate Sept. 11. We should take the advice of Charles Haynes of the First Amendment Center and make Sept. 11 an annual “Day of Freedom,” a celebration of the uniquely American values that the terrorists attacked.
Haynes reminds us of Abraham Lincoln’s words at Gettysburg: “We here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
What better way to commemorate an attack on freedom than by committing to preserve and celebrate that freedom.
It's always difficult when taking a poll like this to make sure that you aren't picking up vibes that people do want to send, but that might not fit with your poll's agenda. If some pollster called me up and asked me whether I favor freedom of the press, I might say 'no' just to help throw a little scare into Howard Raines. I don't have a lot of ways to do that, so if a pollster comes by and hands me a stick, I might hit him with it just for fun. |
Benjamin Franklin: "A republic, madam, if you can keep it."
Yes, the libertarians do struggle like that.
You think we are in danger of an invasion? That is 'so-damn-insane' I needn't comment further.
We need the federal government to provide us with security. If you're not doing anything wrong, you should have nothing to worry about.
How weird, that you would suspect a fellow conservative of 'wrong doing'. Paranoid, are you?
I know its been said before, but it's the truth. The constituion is not a suicide pact.
Who said it was?
-- You're pretty bizarro to be just_another_jerk. -- AFholer?
Monitoring, in itself, is not an infringment of freedom. Its how that monitoring could be used that makes it greatly infringing. If a trail of evidence of terrorist activity led up to a used auto sales company I wouldn't feel any differently about the goverment survailing it as I would a church or a mosque.
The concept of the rule of law is compatible with domestic terrorist investigation. The goverment may more and more try to convince the masses otherwise. Law is a procedure that must apply to one and all equally (enlightened jurisprudence considers us equal under the law). It may not be totaly convienient for the FBI to follow, but it is an essential part of their job description (least I hope to God it still is). If they don't follow rules, well established, they might catch some criminals, yes. And likewise a neurosurgen can relieve your headache by simply chopping off your head!
The FBI has a job to do, a job that is well defined. The fact that we are at war is irrelevant. Do you think for a moment that by wiping away the restrictive rules of search and seizure the FBI will magically be more equipted with fighting terrorism? Could unlimited power avoid massacres like ruby ridge, or waco? Oops bad snide example! bad aSkeptic! bad aSkeptic! Could unlimited power avoid 9/11 or the OCB? If the FBI can't use its limited powers effectivly, how do we expect it to use unlimited powers with any more success?
Regardless of the pitiful position we are in, in terms of security, I am of course aSkeptic of the FBI or really any survailiance body in being total control of the situation.
No matter how much someone stinks of terrorism, if he is a citizen, he has the right to a trial, before his hanging or electrocution. For if he is THAT stinky, its a slam dunk for the procecution. Why oh why don't they give slimers like pediallia (or whosyoumaycallem) a trial? Its crummy work, but its the job they swared to. Nobody said justice is easy.
Good point, Nick. One has to wonder what their real agenda is. Some people wail over the supposed erosion of rights, but really the only thing being eroded today are the interpretations which some have as to what the Bill of Rights says. I fully support the 1st Amendment and see no contradiction to wanting to re-ban pornography, for instance. Images of people copulating are not protected speech, as the Founders would have agreed. The issue of tenure should be raised. We have seen far too many academics proselytise insurrection and moral-liberalism to our future leaders, and removing tenure from college professors isn't a free speech issue. Again, we see the ACLU communist types hiding behind the Constitution they abhor. You can bet that the "Center for Survey Research & Analysis at the University of Connecticut for the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center" will never raise issues about mandated politically-correct speech on campus, since it may not fit into their agenda.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Freedom entails responsibility. I'm always amused by press editorials that bemoan the fact that people are increasingly willing to see the press muzzled... this while the press itself discloses secret war plans and acts like the house organ for one political party that half of the people regularly vote against.