4 ms·
Surveillance may be immoral, but so is warfare, imprisonment, the death penalty, taxation, graft, cronyism, corruption, or pretty much anything else to do with
by w_t_payne 13y ago
Surveillance may be immoral, but so is warfare, imprisonment, the death penalty, taxation, graft, cronyism, corruption, or pretty much anything else to do with the domination of the state over the subservient individual.
- kabdib 13y agoAh, but the constitution permits or has a process for war, imprisonment, death penalties and taxes. (The others you lump in, not so much, though you could argue about cronyism). At least surveillance can be dealt a blow by withdrawing funding.
- w_t_payne 13y agoDoes the presence of a process make it any less immoral? I am sure there are drug cartels with a very rigorous process that they go through when they carry out a revenge killing --- first, extract the pancreas, then the spleen ....
- ash 13y agoWhy does US legal system rely so much on "due process of law"? I think it nearly ignores the spirit of law. That's why US government managed to grow surveillance for so long. It just followed the process for as much as it could manage.
- w_t_payne 13y agoSo much process ... so little spirit. It is, indeed, a sad sight.
- kabdib 13y agoTell a judge "rule this way, because it's moral" and he'll tell you to get out of his court. (Modulo cronyism and the possibility that a judge is prejudiced and/or crooked). Having an argument based on law is much harder to argue against than someone's personal set of moral values. Looking into cultures where "legal" things are decided with a moral system (e.g., most theocracies) I see a lot worse stuff going on. I'm not trying to minimize the nasty and disgusting surveillance system the US has in place, I'm just saying that rule by morality is a double-edge sword.