1. In what ways can civil liberties protections and concerns about national security come into conflict.
On the one hand, it is common knowledge that security of a human being is one of the most important concerns ever. It is important to do all possible and impossible to protect the most valuable thing we have – a human’s life. At the same time constantly emerging technologies ruin all the standard tools of national security. Thus, we get harsh rules and regulations which allow wire tapping and intrusion into personal life. Here comes the main conflict which bothers each and everyone nowadays. It is hard to identify what is more important as both things are extremely valuable. It is impossible to live in a safe country without restricting liberties. If people are given limitless liberty it can turn into chaos finally.
2. What should be the proper balance between liberty and security?
Indeed, it is really hard to choose which indispensible aspect of normal life, security or civil liberty, is more important. However, it is the government which should strike the right balance. On the one had every human is born free. Nevertheless, the rights of the game have dramatically changed. There are too many risks which lead to deaths of innocent people. At the same time it is not correct to make a suspect of every human being. It makes neighbors spy each other. Indeed, people live in a constant fear that tomorrow You may become a suspect.
3. Do you think the U.S. government has gone too far in its passage and implementation of the Patriot Act? Why or why not.
The Patriot Act was a result of severe attack and horror which struck the United States in 2001. Attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were nothing but a bright demonstration of the dread of terrorism, and has pushed the government to taking drastic measures of dependence against terrorist. Thus, President George W. Bush signed this act as a response to the whole society that as of now government has all rights to suspect and spy every citizen. From my point of view the Act was badly needed though belated. It was clear that some acts had to be taken long ago to protect the US citizens from such attacks. At the same time, I consider it to be an act of despair rather than real help. Implementation is not only aimed at fighting terrorism, it is a tool for scaring people. As a result, people have become distrustful, suspicious and intense. The United States of America have always been a real paragon of liberty and security. Thousands of people were striving hard to get to this country with a hope of free and protected life. However, both of these concerns shattered in 2001 when the country was harshly attacked: dreams of securing have broken down like a carton wall, and independence has started to fade away.
4. Discuss one possible benefit of the Ledbetter Act.
The Ledbetter Act was adopted in 2009 as a response to sex discrimination at work. A complaint of a woman who was a victim of pay discrimination was said to be time-barred. A lawsuit was to be passed within 180 days. As a result, it was decided to adopt this Act to allow pay discrimination lawsuits be passed even years after the fact of discrimination actually took place. On the one hand the main advantage may be actually a change in wages and employment conditions to avoid further lawsuits. Indeed, companies will do all possible to make the conditions equal for each and every individual irrespective of his sex, skin or other prejudice. Discrimination has been one of the timeliest concerns in the contemporary world. This very Act will let people understand that at least at work they may be equal.
5. Discuss one possible disadvantage of the Ledbetter Act.
This Act provides more protection to employees. At the same time it restricts deeds of companies. Companies will do all possible to protect first and foremost their own rights. That means that, this very Act may lead to a risk that companies simply stop employing individuals who are likely to pass a lawsuit against that very company. Moreover, companies may simply start terminating existing workers. Those who are already employed may become victims to avoid further similar problems. Indeed, such Acts as the Ledbetter Act are a good tool for regulation and control. The risk of underpay or pay discrimination becomes lower. In parallel, it boosts employers to be more selective and suspicious when choosing new workers.
