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.
With all three branches of government in agreement that this stuff is just fine with them, we may see the opposite sooner rather than later.
I know one thing and that is if the NSA program had been effective, I’d have been long six feet under, a victim of an accidental collision with a drone.
1. If you don't exercise your rights, you risk losing them.
2. You should never have to justify to someone else why you are exercising your rights, or they aren't yours to begin with.
-PJ
The 4th Ammendment does not create the right. It merely codifies the belief of the framers that the right exists. My question is about the ultimate basis for the rights enumerated in the 4th Amendment. What is that foundation?
Just to play devil's advocate here, what about spying on known criminals and suspected terrorists?
Thanks for a thoughtful and germane response. I think the difference is that omniscience is fine in the hands of a just, merciful and loving God who utilizes it for redemptive purposes. Somehow that does not fit the description I would write of the government.
Yep, misconstrued. Or perhaps, just made up.
Where does your expectations of privacy from the government end?
-PJ
Completely agree. But I think the Right shares some blame as well.
Excellent way to follow the logic of the argument.
Excellent point. Somehow I doubt he will understand it. (Or care)
Yes, I completely agree those are our rights. Unfortunately, not many people these days understand why they were adopted in the USC and BOR, so the rationale may need to be debated anew.
I have heard it argued that it is not based in a trust in government, but a trust in God. Personally I find that naive. Trust God,. Never the government.
Excellent point. However, we are rapidly reaching a point where a desire to maintain some level of privacy against the government will be interpreted de facto as criminal behavior.
Just to play devil's advocate here, what about spying on known criminals and suspected terrorists?
Aw, that's easy, newheart: probable cause. If there's legitimate probable cause to believe crimes have been or are being committed, spying may very well make sense; there's no justification, however, for blanket spying on any one person without probable cause, spying en masse without it, or regarding Tea partiers, Christians, abortion opponents, et alia as dangers to the nation.
The feral government has declared its indpendence of both us, the people and the Constitution.
The question then becomes, How much of our right to privacy are we willing to give up in the hope of maintaining some semblance of security.
The heart of the matter.
Kinda chillin’ if ya ask me...
Whether or not I have anything to hide, without probable cause they have no reason to know. This desire to know everything is, to quote Colonel Bat Guano, preverted.
Great scene from Atlas Shrugged. Unfortunately I don’t think Rand has much of a leg to stand on in this argument. Her objectivist position is really just a way of couching a philosophy very close to Nietzsche. Unmitigated self-interest is purely a power dynamic and it is the very root of dictatorships and totalitarian regimes.
In the Republic imagined by Our Founders, the Constitution gave a solid enduring foundation to the rule of law.
In other words the law was not a matter of what was momentarily fashionable.
In any police state, law is quite relative and a matter to what is fashionable.
You correct, I have nothing to hide as I am not presently doing anything illegal other than never wearing my seat belt and speeding.
Problem is the law is being mass manufactured by a bunch of stooges in the legislative branch who have admitted they rarely read the laws that they do pass, and it is revealed time and again they rarely bother to abide by many of the laws that they do pass.
There are so many stupid laws being passed today that much of what I did five years ago will be illegal in another five years.
Still this is not really a problem for me as I am an old man who will never be in the cross hairs of Barry or whoever may be serving as janitor and front man for the police state.
But young people are having information collected today that may not be of present illegal behavior but well may be in another ten years.
What if that young person may decide to run for office later on.
Those who run for public office must account for whatever they have done that was recorded on the public record. But should they have to account for what was recorded a decade ago on the Big Brother's private record?
Just because no abuses of average citizens private information have not occurred, does not mean it won't.
You cannot allow the Fourth Amendment to shredded without understanding the consequences may not be immediate but those consequences over time will be devastating.
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.