Originally posted by RTStabler51: It's good to see that this has turned into a religon debate.
IMO it was only a matter of time, considering that the Islamofanatics are religiously motivated, and this country's laws and system of rights was founded on christian principles.
It is not possible to have 100% "free" rights and 100% protection from outside harm by gov't methods, simulaneously. Having protection requires SOME compromise of people's "right" not to be searched, or be suspect based on their skin color or background, etc. If we could be MUCH safer by sacrificing some small "right" not to be searched or what not, why would it be a bad thing?
