George Bush leads us into the world of Kafka.

quote:

---

Too right! a good example here in Britain is the Thought Police's term for speed cameras: 'safety cameras', though they have very little to do with safety and a much more accurate moniker would be 'money cameras'.

​

If people get used to calling them 'safety-cameras', however, they will tend to think they're there for their own good, rather than the establishment's.

---

While I agree that the terminology used is technically a spin, it is also true that driving at higher speeds is less safe than driving at lower speeds.Consequently, if the use of these cameras make more people obey the speed limit, there will be fewer accidents and loss of life.

---

"Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends! Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!"
- Ned Flanders"Question with boldness even the existence of God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson

quote:

---

Speed may compound the effects of an accident but it very rarely by itself contributes to its cause.

---

Got some facts to back that up? I'd like to know if this is true.And anyway, my point still stands; driving slower leads to less bodily harm and loss of life.

quote:

---

Excessively low speed limits are just another way of exercising control over minute details of people's lives while reinforcing the Big Brother mentality that it's all for our own good.

---

Who said anything about "excessively" slow speed limits?

quote:

---

The US or ANY nation does not begin to spy on its citizens without some sort of reason to do so.

---

"Some sort of reason"?Sure, there's always "some sort of reason" to spy on people.Do you trust every single person who is currently or who will ever come into such power to not ever abuse it, not even once?If you do, you are painfully naive and have not learned the lessons of the Revolutionary War at all.

quote:

---

The people who think they are being watched either are because they are into some bad stuff or they have delusions of granduer and think that they are really special and that the gov't really cares whether or not they masturbate.

---

We know that the government spies on political activists.We know that the government spies on civil rights activists.We know that the government spies on journalists.We know that the government spies on its political enemies.All this has been done with oversight by Congress or the Courts.The Patriot Act removes most or all of this oversight.Do you really think that nobody has, nor will ever in the future, abuse this power, knowing that they will never be held accountable by Congress or the Courts?Think of the liberal politician you detest the most. Now, imagine them with the power of the Patriot Act. Still feel OK about it?

---

"Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends! Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!"
- Ned Flanders"Question with boldness even the existence of God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson

quote:

---

Explain how our civil rights are in jeapordy to begin with? Give me some specific greivances to address. What do you think is happening to you or to other people that is, in essence, criminal?

---

We have lost the right of habeas corpus.

quote:

---

I'm not sure what that has to do with the discussion. Maybe you can elaborate on your meaning.

---

The Patriot Act allows such spying without Congressional or Judicial oversight.

quote:

---

You say that like its a bad thing.

---

It isn't always, but the point is that the power of spying has been abused many times, even with rather strict Congressional and Judicial oversight.We KNOW that abuses take place fairly regularly wven when we watch the Watchers.Now you want to take away any accountability or oversight from the Watchers.

quote:

---

Again, the gov't doesn't just spy on people without some corroborating reason to do so.

---

But if they do not have to tell anybody their reason, don't you think that is dangerous? Don't you think that this is a situation that is ripe for abuse?

quote:

---

What you are doing is demonizing and basically slandering the entire intelligence and counterintelligence community. If they spy on activists its because there is credible reason to believe that they are engaged in illegal activities.

---

This is probably true most of the time.But we KNOW that they don't always do this all of the time.Abuses have happened, and continue to happen.Do you think that removing Congressional and Judicial oversight is going to make it less likely that abuses will occur?

quote:

---

Having said that, I'm certain that somewhere along the line there has been corruption on some level, but surely you have to believe that this would be few and far between.

---

Why do I have to believe that?And besides, do you think that removing Congressional and Judicial oversight is going to make the cases of corruption and abuse [i]less frequent[/b]?

quote:

---

What a ridiculous argument. That's like saying no police officer is allowed to carry a gun because somewhere along the line someobne will use it incorrectly.

---

No, it isn't, because police officers have lots and lots of supervision, and the consequences for misusing their guns are severe.What you are saying wrt the Patriot Act is, "It's perfectly OK if we do not have the ability to know if police officers are misusing their guns. If people are killed or injured with these guns, we, or their families or friends, have no right to know about it."

quote:

---

there are checks and balances in place so that we don't have dictatorships in power. Its called Congress who has to approve these kinds of things.

---

Do you not understand that you have been arguing for an act that removes these checks and balances?

quote:

---

There would not be anarchy. If a group of people had a common and relative understanding about what is good and right, then their would be not be anarchy. There would be education, and working for food, and survival, there would be freedom, but there would also be restriction based upon one's love for the others in the society, and one's committment to making life wonderful for all of those within that society.

---

What if everyone agreed that it was "good and right" that girls shouldn't be educated because their place was in the home making babies?

quote:

---

Everyone would not come to such a decision.

---

This is how things used to be. Why couldn't they be that way again?

quote:

---

You forget that within a society such as this, there are no motives which are for power.

---

To be human is to to want at least some kind of power; power over one's own body at the very least.

quote:

---

Why would a person living in such a community want to control, would they not realize that this is a society filled with those whom you strive to serve.

---

Who says that educating females would make their ability to serve others better? Wouldn't it just get in the way of serving their children and their men?

quote:

---

A torturous device as the one described has no place in a society of educated individuals who see freedom as a precious asset.

---

"Individuals" who "all think the same way"?I'm not sure that makes sense.

quote:

---

An easy approach to my argument of an ideal society, would be to say that humans would want power, and material. That humans are corrupt creatures, capable of the greatest evils. Within a community such as this, where those who live struggle for the benefit of the entire community, where their lives are dedicated to the society, not just themselves, there would be no atrocities as described.

---

Hitler was dedicated to his society."Dedication to one's society" means that the individual isn't important anymore.You can't have everyone agreeing about what is good and right and also maintain individualism.

quote:

---

You say it is idealism, but it is apparent that if humans were together in such a system, they would realize that to harm another is only to harm oneself. Values would be instilled in them from not only education, but from the way their society actually functions. It would be the best reminder to do right.

---

...and individual identity would die.What you are describing is a kind of "benevolent fascism".

quote:

---

Circumstances would arise where an individual would steal, or even worse. The individual would have to be taught the workings of their system. It would have to be apparent that an individual who understands would do no such things.

---

But what if he is hungry and needs food to survive?