Posted on 06/16/2013 6:54:20 AM PDT by newheart
Big Brother, The All-Seeing Eye of Sauron, The Panopticon, The Observers, The Watchers, The Surveillance State, The NSA. Whatever name we use to refer to it there is a fundamental urge to assume that being spied on is bad. (I agree.)
However, in every discussion of the problem there is always someone who will pop up with an off-the-cuff remark that goes something like this,"If you have nothing to hide, who cares?" or "I'm not doing anything wrong, so what difference does is make?"
On the surface that sounds reasonable, right? Those who are not guilty have nothing to hide, right?
I am particularly interested in the "Christian" variation of the argument that uses Luke 8:17, "There is nothing hidden that will not be revealed," so what's the big deal?
Here are my questions, submitted to the all-knowing (if not all-seeing) Freeper community.
1. Fundamentally what is wrong with being spied upon?
2. What is the problem with the "I have nothing to hide, who cares?" argument? (Or, if you prefer, you are most welcome to defend that position.)
Freepontificate to your heart's content. Remember, anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. (But of course no one is really listening?) I'm off to church to worship the only true (and trustworthy) omniscient being.
What I think or say privately is none of your or anyone’s D@MN business!!
I like fried chicken....really...I like fried chicken.
Simple enough- the more power given to the government, the more it will be abused. And, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. So nobody placed in charge can remain incorruptible.
My thoughts exactly.
1. Fundamentally what is wrong with being spied upon?
You first... What’s fundamentally right about it?
Define private! If your conversation is carried on an air wave that is not "private".
Would you consider people talking on walkie talkies to be carrying out a "private" conversation?
Food for thought.
As long as we’re snooping, let’s have a look at your bank account, tax returns, etc.
I'm not making the argument that there is anything fundamentally right about it.
I worry especially about our young folk - they will be propagandized, “corrected”, show-trialed, etc. Just look at Stalin and that will tell you all you need to know about how totalitarians treat information
You would be quite disappointed, I'm sure. :-)
As Nazi Germany showed, the ability to compile information about the citizenry gives the government the ability to eliminate the undesirables before any real opposition can develop to stop them.
When even the most innocent of remarks (nothing to hide) can be misconstrued to mean anything the perpetrators want them to appear to mean, the abuses are begging to be tapped.
Good point. Of course, sound is carried on airwaves, so by extension, any conversation you might have with someone else, even in person and alone with them, could be considered to be not-private. (I'm not advocating that, just raising the question.)
>>
1. Fundamentally what is wrong with being spied upon?
<<
Why are there doors and walls on bathrooms and showers?
>>2. What is the problem with the “I have nothing to hide, who cares?” argument? (Or, if you prefer, you are most welcome to defend that position.)<<
There are several reasons, but the most practical is that what you say or do is subject to INTERPRETATION that may make your private acts public.
It is why you should NEVER let police check your car without a search warrant (say “Office, I do not consent to searching my vehicle. Am I free to go?”).
2. What is the problem with the "I have nothing to hide, who cares?" argument? (Or, if you prefer, you are most welcome to defend that position.)
Democrats and liberal activist judges are always chomping at the bit with this tripe, and are innately prone to "interpreting" the meaning and intent of various parts of the Constitution that fit their subversive aims.
So, turnabout is always said to be fair play. I'll fair-play this. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. My INTERPRETATION is that Happiness requires privacy.
Done, over, nuff said, don't need no Socratic balderdash to pointless discuss a stone-written hard point.
Where's the transparency Obamao promised?
Louie Gohmert Accuses FBI Of Aiding Muslim Brotherhood: ‘They Want Sharia Law, Not Our Constitution'
” What is the problem with the “I have nothing to hide, who cares?” argument?”
Just because you say you don’t have anything to hide doesn’t necessarily mean that whoever is doing the analysis won’t misinterpret or misrepresent what information they may be disseminating.
The one exception being that thought, I suppose.
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.