Civil liberties or anti-terror laws? Favorite

This website uses Adobe® Flash™ Player 9
Download Flash Now

If you are using Internet Explorer, you will need to restart your browser after installing Flash.
Adobe and Flash are registered trademarks of Adobe Systems incorporated. All rights reserved.

189 views • Uploaded September 16, 2009

Don't agree with the Indian students but they are the most impressive, its a shame no one dealt with who these terrorists are ie mostly middle class and western educated or discussed the lack of value we attach to humanity - also seen in clamp down on civil liberties and expressed at the extreme by acts of terrorism..

They did argue rather well, yet I find it difficult to take their stance on the issue. The lesser of two evils? Should we be practising ANY evil let alone a lesser evil? This demonstrates a moral shift that contradicts our ideals of 'democracy'. How many exception to the rule can we make?

Loved this debate, very fierce and lively and the students from India posed some real challenges to those of us who believe in civil liberties. What do we think is good about a democratic society? Civil liberties - freedom of speech, the right to move freely without the prying eye of the state is central to democracy, to our freedom, and yet it is being eroded. The winning team tried to argue that people are okay with their civil liberties being taken away in order to be safe. I don't agree, people all over the world show great resilience after a terrorist attack - people don't want to give up their freedoms and live in fear. That's resilience, and a great thing too.

Fascinating debate but I am not sure whether this platform (the debate) is the best way to deal with such an important and highly emotive subject.

Comments Feed