27 August 2003

Articles defending the PATRIOT Act, though few, can be found. Here's one and here's another.

Both defend the Act on the grounds it is constitutional. Perhaps (I ain't got time to argue it now). But the fact that something is constitutional does not make it correct. Almost any law infringes on some right and the removal of rights not explicitly enumerated (thus reserved to States and citizens) will always be a gray area of constitutional law. However, there must come a time when we heed Mr. Franklin's warning: "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security." I think that time is now. Whether or not these are technical violations of the constitution they violate the spirit of American liberty and if they are allowed to pass will be followed by worse.


No comments: