A comment I left in nancylebov's journal, about spying on forei

[xiphias]

The problem is that we have an entire government which is unfamiliar with the principles upon which that government was founded.

Our government exists to protect rights. Said rights are inherent to being human -- they're not given to us by our government; they are inherent to us. The Bill of Rights is intended to be a few examples of the sorts of rights they're talking about; it's not intended to be an exhaustive list (and, in fact, Alexander Hamilton opposed the Bill of Rights because he feared that people WOULD take it as an exhaustive list, and ignore other rights. The rest of the Founding Fathers felt that that was ridiculous, and that NOBODY could be THAT stupid).

It is not the government's responsibility to protect the privacy rights of foreigners. Because the government exists to protect the rights of the people for whom that government is set up.

However, that does not make it okay for the government to breach those rights.

Obviously, rights are not, in a sense, absolute. We have a right to property, but we still have taxation. We have a right to liberty, but we can be jailed. We have a right to privacy, but we can have our houses searched with a warrant.

The thing is, we have specific procedures and oversight for HOW those rights are limited, and in what circumstances.

So, the government can, with proper procedures, take actions which curtail our rights. However, the PRIMARY purpose of the government is to prevent OTHERS from curtailing those rights.

The government isn't responsible for making sure that the rights of people outside the country aren't curtailed. But it IS responsible for making sure that the rights of people INSIDE the country aren't curtailed, citizens or no. And it is not okay for the government to take actions which curtail ANYONE'S rights, citizen or no, inside or outside the United States, without proper procedures, oversight, and transparency.

Comments

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

Our government exists to protect rights.

Not everyone agrees on this one, which is one of the fundamental problems. I'd agree with "was created to protect rights" and I'd hope for "should exist to protect rights", but...

Anyway, that's a side point. I, too, believe that the government must respect the rights it (ought to) defends, both for citizens and residents and also for guests (voluntary or otherwise) in US-controlled territories (e.g. Guantanamo). Transparency is the hallmark of democracy, and is the thing that makes it more resilient to corruption than other forms of government; the trend in my lifetime has been toward less and less transparency.

[paper-crystals.livejournal.com]

I thought we had this understanding all this time that the government was there to protect people against the heathenous gays marrying. And since they failed at that then bending a few other laws shouldn't really matter right?

/sarcasm

[navrins]

Well said.

[rmjwell.livejournal.com]

The US government is an expression of the power and will of the citizenry of the United States.

More later....

power and will of the citizenry...

[(Anonymous)]

Well, yes. It was this fear that caused the delay in getting the constitution approved. Given this situation "the mob" was all powerful. The solution was the bill of rights, to limit the power of the majority, as exercised through the elected representatives, from persecuting, oppressing, and generally being nasty to the law abiding minority. And even then it was a hard sell.
Duzzy (pere du xiphias)