Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by bluto (225) on 2006.01.20 10:55 (#45751)
    Evidently, the freedom to assemble and protest peacefully without interference from the government goes a long way to providing an alternative to terrorism.

    This is certainly true, but I think the bigger reason is that these countries suppress the idea of inalienable rights. Once the idea is embraced that you, and everyone around you, has rights that no mere man/government can rightfully take from you, you are changed fundamentally. It not only points you in the direction of fixing the wrongs, but gives you long term determination/hope of doing so without resorting to killing lots of innocent people in order to get your way.

    • How can there be civil liberties without inalienable rights or vice versa? Aren’t they synonymous?

      • Civil liberties descend from government and can be taken away by government at their whim. Inalienable rights descend from no human power, so they cannot be revoked by human power. For example, your right to live is inalienable (arguably with the condition that you don't usurp someone else's right to live, say via murder). A government may make a law that allows it to take your life away when you've committed no crime (e.g. euthanasia when you become "useless" to society), but that doesn't take away your