Freedom Vs Security.

Which one?

  • Security

    Votes: 11 9.8%
  • Freedom

    Votes: 63 56.3%
  • 50-50

    Votes: 38 33.9%

  • Total voters
    112
Id take freedom.. i can sort my own security myself thank you!
 
nonconformist said:
Which is, ironically, the opposite of which the Republicans hgave been doing for the past while.

I would have to disagree. De-centralized government itself is a sprawling octopus, that advances assymmetrically with a growth pattern more like the internet. Central Government, by its very nature, collapses because it is small, geocentrically positioned. De-centralization is by far the best means to insure maximum government.
 
I rather die with my freedom, then live in a police state.
 
Security first, freedom second. I voted 50-50.
 
Joseph Stalin said:
Security first, freedom second.

Yeah, but you would ;)
 
Security is more important to me
 
greekguy said:
I rather die with my freedom, then live in a police state.
Question: Do you live in Israel?
 
The Yankee said:
George W. Bush said it best, as I found in my copy of Time Magazine this week:

"The vast majority of Iraqis perfer freedom with intermittent power to life in the permanent darkness of tyranny and terror."
-President George W. Bush, warning Americans to gird for more violence in Iraq over the coming year

Time Magazine, Notebook, January 23, 2006 issue, page 15.

That's the first quote from Bush that I have seen that has any significant historical value and doesn't sound like he stuttered it!
 
storealex said:
Question: Do you live in Israel?

no, i live in New Jersey, USA. i am Jewish, so that's why i've got the Israeli flag as my avatar.
 
blackheart said:
That's the first quote from Bush that I have seen that has any significant historical value and doesn't sound like he stuttered it!
I found it pretty ironic also, given the security mantra and the oldie-but-goodie "they hate us for our freedom."
 
I really don't think you can have one without the other, but people go a little too far with the whole freedom thing. I like being secure. The whole wire tappign thing doesn't bother me, because I have nothign to be afraid of the government finding out. I'm a good person, my freedoms haven't been infringed upon, and I feel more secure. But there has to be a balance. Always.
 
What would be better?

A CFC forum where you could post whatever you wanted and not having to worry about mods breathing down your neck, which resulted in a more hostile, less usefrienldy enviroment,

or

One that like the one that we have where we allow mods to keep the posters in check so that everyone can have their say in the safest possible enviroment?
 
"...you can't trust freedom
when it's not in your hands
when everybody's fightin'
for their promised land..."


-Guns 'N Roses

Sorry, couldn't resist. :D
 
So is pretty much everyone for freedom? Cus by freedom i mean something like 70-30, freedom-security. Opposite for security.
 
sealboy6 said:
I really don't think you can have one without the other, but people go a little too far with the whole freedom thing. I like being secure. The whole wire tappign thing doesn't bother me, because I have nothign to be afraid of the government finding out. I'm a good person, my freedoms haven't been infringed upon, and I feel more secure. But there has to be a balance. Always.

Its not a matter of whether or not you did something bad its a matter of whether or not your legitimate actions could be considered suspicious. Your library or web searching habits could mean your a possible terroritst or you just like to argue about terrorism over the internet. If the government gets ahold of this info they might use their dimwitted intellect to make false accusations. I'm sure the great American justice system will free you in the end but that doesn't mean that being falsely accused and then vindicated might not ruin your life.
 
Back
Top Bottom