View Single Post
Old 04-10-2009, 08:15 AM   #70 (permalink)
Willravel
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
I never understood the problem with the "wiretap" program, and still don't. I do look at the issue in two different ways and answers to the questions below could help me understand the problem if there is one.

Who was victimized and how were they damaged?
I'm almost certain we've gone over privacy before. If you don't value your privacy that's fine. No one will force you to be private. The problem is that not only do a lot of people value their privacy as a fundamental right, but that same fundamental right is in the Bill of Rights and numerous court rulings since. It's why we have warrants. You need probable cause in order to breach someone's privacy.

What the large telecoms and Bushco (and now Obama) did was bypass existing FISA laws to unlawfully spy on people. They could not supply probable cause, presumptively because there was none. Again, whether or not you value privacy, I know that you value adherence to the law, not just as a conservative but as aceventura, as a conviction.

I could explain to you why privacy is important to me, but that's not likely to convince you because you have a different set of values. If you disagree strongly enough with my values, feel free to do anything and everything you can to legally change existing privacy laws, but I should warn you that you'll be fighting an uphill battle.

---------- Post added at 09:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:11 AM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq View Post
It sounds more like you'd be a martyr for rights, not actually sieze what are your rights.
I'd not be dying to further a cause, just to defend it, so martyr is the wrong term. My personal convictions tell me that people have been placing a low value on human life since the dawn of civilization, and I refuse to follow the trend. It is a conviction to value human life, even over other important rights.

I'll simplify. I'd not kill someone for free speech. Does that mean I don't value free speech? Only to an absolutist (and absolutists are absolutely always wrong without exception ). I do value free speech, a great deal in fact, but not to the point where I'd violate my strongest conviction and kill someone over it. As soon as I cross that line, I violate my own code of convictions and I'm no better than anyone that's gone to war.
Willravel is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360