Your Republican Bench in Action...

Richard Posner, Seventh Circuit Appeals Judge and hero to Conservatives everywhere asks you this question...

"So you want to give up your civil liberties voluntarily, or wait to have them taken away?"

I just think that almost all Americans would consider that turning back the civil liberties clock to, say, 1960 would be worthwhile if as a result some horrendous terrorist attack was prevented. I am of the same mind. I find it hard to understand the contrary position, but I would not argue against it. I would point out, however, the self-defeating character of civil liberties absolutism. If as a result of such absolutism another major terorrist attacks occurs, civil liberties are pretty sure to go out the window.

I would also argue against those who say that history shows that the threat of terrorism is much less than other threats that we have overcome. That is a misuse of history. History does not contain nuclear bombs the size of oranges, genetically engineered smallpox virus that is vaccine-proof, and an Islamist terrorist (Bin Laden) who visited a cleric in Saudi Arabia to obtain--successfully--the cleric's approval to wage nuclear war against the West.

I'm sorry, but what the hell do these various assertions mean? History also doesn't reflect a lot of President's flying to Aircraft Carriers with an armadillo in their flightsuit either. Nuclear bombs the size of oranges? I thought they were not even briefcase sized yet? What a tautological bunch of supposition and hooey!

What is the "arbitrary" benefit of civil liberties as they existed in 1960?

A lot of us who give a damn about privacy would argue that "1960's" Civil Liberties would be more expansive than they are now. The only real distinction between the arbitrary year 1960 and later years is that things like the 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act were passed. After 1960 is also comes "Monroe v. Pape" and "Miranda" and other cases that expounded upon the meaning of the 14th Amendment and prohibited governmental abuses.

Uh-Oh, did we stumble on to something that shows the world Judge Posner would like?

Posner's little statement also takes on a more sinister meaning if one consideration such recent stories as torture abuses in Iraq, Afghanistan and Gitmo; Al "Nipple Clamps" Gonzales attempts to justify torture; and the newly released idea out of the Bush Administration that we should just permanently lock up those heathens we have in our custody for no other reason than "they are muslim".

Pardon me, if I think in these cases "Civil Liberties" becomes a morality versus immorality question. It is clearly not one that has as its necessary predicate that if we act like we are a decent and civil society on occasion we are going to be killed by terrorists.