![]() ![]() We see a similar momentum building in Congress. The supporters of these efforts are conservatives, liberals, moderates and independents – people concerned about the impact of decisions and actions the government is taking with serious consequences for their personal freedom of expression, of association, and – most importantly – the freedom to be left alone in their individual pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. These communities represent an extraordinarily diverse group of Americans – more than forty-five million people from small towns, such as North Pole, Alaska and Carrboro, North Carolina, all the way to large metropolitan areas like Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York City. Two hundred and sixty communities in thirty-eight states – as well as the entire state legislatures of Alaska, Hawaii and Vermont – have adopted resolutions in support of the “Safe and Free” message. These two developments merit serious attention because their combined outcomes will determine whether America prosecutes the war on terror while safeguarding essential liberties.Ĭonsider the momentum building for liberty here at home. And the second is the Supreme Court’s decision to review the actions the government is taking in the name of national security. ![]() The first is the growing momentum in support of liberty at home and abroad. My purpose today is to draw attention to two significant developments whose impact has not yet been fully appreciated. What are we fighting for if not the values of freedom, liberty, equality and tolerance? Precisely because we expect the terrorist threat to be with us for a long time, we must take extra precaution to safeguard our liberties. Let’s never forget that we are the political descendants of practical visionaries such as Benjamin Franklin, who at the birth of the republic – when our country’s very existence was in doubt – warned against “giving up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety.” Those who engage in such dangerous tradeoffs, said Franklin, “deserve neither liberty nor safety.”įor the past two and a half years, our country has been struggling with the challenge of protecting us from a new kind of enemy – a loose, far-flung network of terrorist organizations whose threat will extend for the foreseeable future. The debate over the proper balance between liberty and security goes to the heart of who we are as a nation, where we come from, and where we are headed. The threat is also apparent in the arbitrary, unequal and unconstitutional treatment of hundreds of immigrants detained after 9-11, and in the shameful indefinite detention of hundreds of foreigners at Guantánamo Bay. The danger is most apparent in the expansive assertion of new executive powers at the expense of individual liberty. This is especially true in time of war when zealous government officials often attempt to accumulate unchecked powers under the guise of national security. Since 9-11, the ACLU has insisted on the need for Americans to be both “Safe and Free.” Pursuing security at the expense of freedom is a dangerous and self-defeating proposition for a democracy. MEDIA: PLEASE CHECK SPEECH AGAINST DELIVERY ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |