Home > Politics, News & Issues > Political & Economic Theory
Results so far:
| Yes | 42% | 294 votes | Total: 702 votes | |
| No | 58% | 408 votes |
Created on: February 26, 2009
The war of 1812 taught the world something about America. In defeating the British in Canada, New York and Florida, The United States did one thing above all else that established itself as a country. It did not bypass, suspend or otherwise bend the will of the constitution. The people's rights came above all else and President Madison realized this.
While it is no longer the 1800's, history should serve as a reminder of what has come before. There have been times in the history of the United States that trials and tribulations have persuaded our leaders to attempt to limit the rights of the people for the defense of the country. However, The rights of the population, the people, should be supreme in any situation.
The balance of power between a nation and its people has always been a tenuous one at best. The basic question being, where does the individual stop and the nation start. The nation of course is made up of the voices of millions of people, delegated to members of their choosing for the legislature. That being said, the nature of government is to look after the general well being of it citizens, which includes national security. This theory is the basis of the debate between national security and civil rights.
The governments responsibility to protect its people should be second to its upholding the rights of its citizens. Civil rights in the United States is one of the premier aspects of our way of life. The country was founded on the principles that government should have limits on its power. That the power of the people should forever be more powerful than the its ruling body. This may make it difficult at times, however, it is the basis of a democratic nation. To suspend the civil rights of the population in favor of national security would violate the very principles set in the constitution.
National security and civil rights have the ability to co-exist and have for the last 233 years. While this relationship is tenuous at best, one does not have to impede on the other. The processes and procedures that have been in effect have checks and balances to make sure that the rights of the citizens are taken into consideration. Without these checks and balances, the government holds power over the citizens, and eventually will hold more power than the people.
In order to preserve the "American" way of life, the civil rights of its people are more important than matters of national security. While these rights may be temporarily suspended in times of invasion or civil strife, they should not be on a day to day basis. Suspending these rights at all should weigh heavily on the minds of the members of the government who the people have chosen as their voice.
Learn more about this author, Jared Jeannotte.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Below are the top articles rated and ranked by Helium members on:
Is national security more important than civil rights?
No
Yes
View all articles on: Is national security more important than civil rights?
Featured Partner
The OP Music House, Inc. is a 501(c)3 non-profit community center featuring two elements: (1) a music venue and recording studio for young adults, where local musicians donate their time to offer tips, advice, friendship and to jam. ...more