Question by : Should we worry that General James Jones National security advisor is stepping down?
This is the 3rd General either fired or let go by President Obama, Are we safe with Obama at the helm? Who will be next? Is Obama worried about our military leaders leaving? Should we be worried or should we just have “faith” that Obama will take care of the National security issues and protect our Country better then our Military can? The liberals and Obama must think so…….
Best answer:
Answer by wonderlich Yes we should. Worried and afraid.
Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!
Question by PixeL DuSt: blogs should be censored because it is a threat to national security?
our debate motion is “blogs should be censored because it is a threat to national security”. i am the opposition, therefore i am against this motion. help me find the points and tell me your point of view. thanks.
Best answer:
Answer by JeX Censorship is the actual threat to national security.
Question by jazzyboo: Freedom of Religion and Speech, do you think there should be any limitations on it?
I am doing a paper on the 4th amendment about freedom of religion and speech ,and want some peoples opinions on it. Do you think there should be any limitations put on your right of freedom of speech and your religion?
Best answer:
Answer by MarIboro Man I think there are far too many restrictions on speech the way it is. As far as freedom of religion, as long as no one else is hurt, religious practices should be legal.
Texas Rep. Ron Paul, fresh off a win in the Illinois Republicans presidential candidate straw poll, is ruling out an independent bid for the White House, saying he doesn’t want to go that route. “I have no intention doing that. That doesn’t make sense to me to even think about it, let alone plan to do that,” Paul told “Fox News Sunday.” Asked why, Paul responded: “Because I don’t want to do it. That’s the reason.” But Paul said that if he’s not the nominee, he’s not certain that he would support the GOP nominee. “Probably not unless I get to talk to them and find out what they believe in. But if they believe on expanding the wars, if they don’t believe in looking at the Federal Reserve; if they don’t believe in real cuts, if they don’t believe in deregulation and better tax system, it would defy everything I believe in,” Paul said. “And so, therefore, I would be reluctant to jump on board and tell all of the supporters that have given me trust and money that all of a sudden, I’d say, all we’ve done is for naught. So, let’s support anybody at all … even if they disagree with everything that we do,” Paul added. The three-time presidential candidate, and one-time Libertarian nominee, gave as an example Herman Cain, whose recent scrutiny over alleged sexual harassment claims isn’t what bothers Paul. “The allegations against his program, he’s liking, you know, the Federal Reserve and his national sales tax — yes, they are very legitimate and his support for bailouts, those …
Question by ♪: To what extent, for the sake of national security, should individual rights and freedoms be restricted?
Can the restriction of civil rights for the sake of national security be justified?
Should decisions be made by the upper echelons of government in which the American public is not informed?
To what extent?
Have Americans forgotten that they are supposed to be a PART of the system of checks and balances? That it isn’t just the executive, congressional and legislative branches, but that they have a role in this, as well?
Are you concerned about the constitution being subverted in recent years?
What would be your solution to upholding your constitutional rights?
Best answer:
Answer by mschick_2007 All I can think of is that we learned in high school that america is set up on a balance scale. do whatever you want as long as you don’t put yourself or anyone else in danger. I agree with that. And as long as people are stupid, the government will have to intervene. It’s a way of life.
America has proven with the copy cat criminals that authority figures have to keep certain things private in order to protect the whole country. Sure, let them keep secrets; we all do it. and they got in their positions for a reason.
Question by C.S.: Should a person be allowed to break the law in the name of freedom of religion?
For example, Native Americans are allowed to possess eagle feathers in violation of the Endangered Species Act.
This is a should question, not an ‘are’ question: so give me your ideal answers about whether freedom of religion should trump the law. (particularly when that law has no human victims).
On the Native American thing, they won a court ruling saying they could violate ESA. It wasn’t provided for in law, but was an exception made legally.
Best answer:
Answer by bdouglasharris Yes, unless your religious beliefs entail violating the rights of others (i.e. keeping same-sex couples from getting married).
Question by Blue: Should Blackberry Phones be illegal in the US also and is the phone a national security risk?
In United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia they are banned. Black Berry messaging is encrypted. Its a national security risk they say. So will they be illegal in the US also soon or is our government smarter? Should all forms of encryption be illegal including https websites for credit cards? Is it really that big of a risk? Do you think our Government will try to ban encryption also?
Question by chwcs: Should illegal aliens in the USA be offered citizenship to fight in the war with the Terrorists?
Do you feel it would stop all of the illegal alliens in our country from being exploited. I feel that if they want to become americans they should have to help defend our country. I also believe that it would lower our cost to maintain them and give them back their dignity. That by fighting they become americian. Our founding fathers fought so that we could be free and become Indenpendent. All of us had come from different countries (with the execption of the americian native indians) I feel that if they want our rights then they should have to defend those rights.I feel that it would be the lesser of the two evils, ( sweat shops, abuse, rape, salvery)
Illegal alliens should not have our rights if they can not fight for freedom as our founding fathers. Yet as it stands now they march through our cities demanding those rights. Let them earn them. WHAT DO YOU THINK.
Question by studentlearner: Should the Constitution be rewritten to reflect modern concerns?
Some parts of the Constitution seem unclear, unnecessary, or outdated. Should the Constitution be rewritten to reflect modern concerns?