Efficiency versus civil liberties

[DGUtley]

Rights, though not absolute, must take precedence over expediency and efficiency. Again, not absolute.

[Cletus]

Rights, though not absolute, must take precedence over expediency and efficiency. Again, not absolute.

If rights are not absolute, are we working on the premise they are really nothing more than privileges granted by government?

[Newpublius]

efficiency in government

A basic oxymoron there.

[Chris]

If rights are not absolute, are we working on the premise they are really nothing more than privileges granted by government?

In a sense, they are not absolute since we do give up certain enumerated rights as powers to the government. Still, as the Declaration states, we do reserve absolute "Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government." Thus in a Burkean sense of self-government, "Liberty must be limited in order to be possessed." Even individually we try to limit our rights to not doing harm to others or interfering with the rights of others.

[Cletus]

I tend to think that almost any exercise of government power involves infringing on the rights of the individual. Some of those, we willingly allow government to infringe upon, mostly to make society work, but it is still an infringement. The right doesn't cease to exist just because society prevents you from exercising it.

Government is by its very nature, the greatest violator of the rights of the individual.

[Chris]

I tend to think that almost any exercise of government power involves infringing on the rights of the individual. Some of those, we willingly allow government to infringe upon, mostly to make society work, but it is still an infringement. The right doesn't cease to exist just because society prevents you from exercising it.

Government is by its very nature, the greatest violator of the rights of the individual.

True, infringement, or limiting in self-government, doesn't mean we do not still have rights. Most cries of injustice are about infringements on rights.

[nathanbforrest45]

Rights, though not absolute, must take precedence over expediency and efficiency. Again, not absolute.

Rights are absolute. If rights are not absolute they cannot possibly be considered a "right" but a privilege. It is this idea that rights are not absolute that is leading us down the path of totalitarianism. Where do you draw the line of how a right might be infringed? We have a right to keep and bare arms. Ah, but that doesn't mean we can own machine guns. If we can't own machine guns why can't we also not be allowed to own semi automatic pistols? The government cannot infringe on my right to freedom of religion. Well, we can shut down the church and stop you from practicing that religion. All we need to do is declare it an emergency. Rights either are or they are not.

Rights are not granted by government, they are either protected or infringed upon. Rights come from the very fact that we are human and have fundamental right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. All other rights stem from that basic right.

[carolina73]

What makes you think the Chi-coms are more efficient? You been watching CNN again?

China has a totally incompetent lower and middle management in Govt. thats afraid to make any decision that could end up being seen as against the party line. They are petrified of that. The party is ran at the top by a bunch of A-holes that threw a communist party party in Wuhan, including a banquet for 40,000 families, even tho they knew there was a dangerous virus spreading. Imagine that?

Their building codes are nonexistant, corruption is rampant, their air and water are horrendous in the best of times, every bit of data coming out of that place is a Lie. Even so their GDP is only $18,00 per capita, which is a Lie anyway, "ours is $59,000". They have no freedom of speech, no real individual rights, they have a concentration camp system with a million people inside who's only offense is they way they chose to worship God. One thing they have going for them is they have no illegal immigration problem because who in hell would want to live there?

And lastly they infected the entire world with a bad virus even tho they could have contained it and at the least helped coordinate a better world response except for their affinity for Lies and deception.

But yes, other then all that they are very efficient.

Exactly. They are just more efficient a lying.
I have dealt with Chinese businessmen since the 1980s and they taught us we could never believe a promise from them. Yes means nothing to them.

They are so used to lying they do not think they are lying.

Does anyone believe the Corona Virus numbers they gave us?

[Captdon]

It is certainly an appropriate question--anytime; but especially now: Is efficiency in government a higher value than civil liberties; or should it be viewed the other way around?

For reference, the Chinese form of government is certainly more efficient than ours; but civil liberties are practically nonexistent there.

So would we wish to trade our form of government for that of the Chinese?

Think about it...

The world is full pf crazies.

[Captdon]

If rights are not absolute, are we working on the premise they are really nothing more than privileges granted by government?

Freedom of speech doesn't permit you to start a riot.