Presentation on theme: "Technology and Privacy Benjamin Franklin once said, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty."— Presentation transcript:
Technology and Privacy Benjamin Franklin once said, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Shane Waller
Roe v. Wade Roe v. Wade was a controversial Supreme Court case in 1973. It ruled that laws banning abortion were unconstitutional. Since then, many laws and regulations have been passed to prohibit the access to abortion. Anti abortion forces have steadily reduced the scope of abortion rights. “Those who believe life begins at conception feel that the unborn child deserves the same legal protections as an adult. Ending such a life is equivalent to murder to those who subscribe to this belief. Others argue that life begins at birth, and that laws restricting abortion interfere with the right of a woman to decide what is in her own best interests.” http://www.ushistory.org/us/57d.asp Brittany McGlew
“The Fourth and Fifth Amendments sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions, and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone— the most comprehensive of rights and the one most valued by civilized men.” –Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis on, “The Right to Privacy.” Olmstead v. United States and the Integration of Technology in the American Legal System The integration of technology in the American Legal system, and in society in general, severely challenged the concept of privacy within the American home, inevitably taking away control from white males over their domestic lives, concerning both personal and legal matters. Daniel Rafferty, American Politics.
“Before Prohibition, many states relied heavily on excise taxes in liquor sales to fund their budgets. In New York, almost 75% of the state's revenue was derived from liquor taxes. With Prohibition in effect, that revenue was immediately lost. At the national level, Prohibition cost the federal government a total of $11 billion in lost tax revenue, while costing over $300 million to enforce.” Lerner, M. (2011). Prohibition a Film by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick. Retrieved April 23, 2014, from PBS: http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/prohibition/unintended-consequences/
“ Discovery and invention have made it possible for the government, by means far more effective than stretching upon the rack, to obtain disclosure in court of what is whispered in the closet…The progress of science in furnishing the government with means of espionage is not likely to stop with wire tapping. Ways may some day be developed by which the government, without removing papers from secret drawers, can reproduce them in court, and by which it will be enabled to expose to a jury the most intimate occurrences of the home, “Louis Brandeis, dissenting opinion, Olmstead v. United States, 1928. Louis D. Brandeis