Catholics for the abolishment of "Freedom of Information Legislation"

I hate the freedom of information act.

It causes millions of impoverished minorities and ex-cons to be held down and suppressed by those in power. Are there any other Catholics like me who want to abolish this stupid act.

gilc.org/privacy/survey/intro.html
***"Privacy is a fundamental human right ***recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights and in many other international and regional treaties. Privacy underpins human dignity and other key values such as freedom of association and freedom of speech. It has become one of the most important human rights issues of the modern age. The publication of this report reflects the growing importance, diversity and complexity of this fundamental right.

This report provides details of the state of privacy in fifty countries from around the world. It outlines the constitutional and legal conditions of privacy protection, and summarizes important issues and events relating to privacy and surveillance.

Nearly every country in the world recognizes a right of privacy explicitly in their Constitution. At a minimum, these provisions include rights of inviolability of the home and secrecy of communications. Most recently-written Constitutions such as South Africa’s and Hungary’s include specific rights to access and control one’s personal information.

In many of the countries where privacy is not explicitly recognized in the Constitution, [size=]such as the United States, Ireland and India, the courts have found that right in other provisions. In many countries, international agreements that recognize privacy rights such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the European Convention on Human Rights have been adopted into law[/size]."

Anyone who claims to be Christian should be concerned with this issue…!!! This is real oppression happening right now, right before our own very eyes, yet everyone refuses to make notice of it… Why, I wonder…?

Why not offer equal rights to all people…?

I hope somebody has the guts to stand up for what’s right and make a post on this thread. :mad:

I think you need to be a little more specific regarding the exact nature of your concern.

Yes, of course… My concern lies in the fact that there are millions of Americans held down and force-fed welfare because they cannot find decent work because of their “records” which the federal govornment makes public because of the “freedom of information act”…

I, for example, have been out of work for almost two years because of my public record, and was fired just yesterday for this very reason once they did a background check.

I used to earn a six-figure income and have now been reduced to homeless. This is shameful, especially in the most powerful nation on earth… :confused:

I have no liberty.
I have no privacy.
I have no freedom… :shrug:

I have personally used the freedom of information act to obtain information from the government that they would likely not have given up otherwise.

I am sorry to hear about your troubles.

But this is a good law.

Oh, so you think it’s a fair trade-off to deny peoples privacy for other types of information from the gov…?

Don’t you see the potential goodness for at least “fixing” the FOIA… We would’nt need to rely on illegal immigrantrs and we could clean up the inner city ghettos at the same time by allowing those with “records” to gain employment once again…!!! :shrug:

If you are referring specifically to background checks at work then I agree. The Oregon legislature is currently considering a bill that would put an end to such practices.

I am sorry about your troubles, but the freedom of information act (usually) applies to the government, governmental agencies, and may apply to companies that want to do business with agencies. The Supreme Court HAS read privacy into our Constitution (US) (see Lawrence v. Texas, Meyer v. Nebraska, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Casey). So even though the right to “Privacy” is not explicit in our constitution the court has said that privacy is a substantive due process right. While this has many obvious benefits, the definition of privacy by the court has brought grief for many Catholics and the souls of many. :frowning:

Take away Freedom of Information and you have a government that do all its business secretly — pretty scary.I will agree that I think what companies do with marketing information needs to be more restricted. I hate the fact that if I donate to what I think is a worthy charity they sell my name and I get calls from people I’ve never heard of.

What is coming up in your background check that is causing such an issue? Criminal record. You may want to consult an attorney and see if your record can be expunged or sealed. However, if you are in education or a few other fields your record will come up despite these measures.

Freedom of Information Act Exemptions
The Freedom of Information Act entitles the following exemptions on documents being requested by the public:

  1. Those documents properly classified as secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy;

  2. Related solely to internal personnel rules and practices;

  3. Specifically exempted by other statutes;

  4. A trade secret or privileged or confidential commercial or financial information obtained from a person;

  5. A privileged inter-agency or intra-agency memorandum or letter;

  6. A personnel, medical, or similar file the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;

  7. Compiled for law enforcement purposes, the release of which
    a) could reasonably be expected to interfere with law enforcement proceedings,
    b) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication,
    c) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy,
    d) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source,
    e) would disclose techniques, procedures, or guidelines for investigations or prosecutions, or

  • could reasonably be expected to endanger an individual’s life or physical safety;
  1. Contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports about financial institutions that the SEC regulates or supervises; or

  2. And those documents containing exempt information about gas or oil wells.

http://www.sec.gov/foia/nfoia.htm"

Look at line 7:c… an “unwarranted invasion of personal privacy”… Now what constitutes a “WARRANTED” invasion of “personal” & “private” records…? Surely an attempt to persue employment could not pass as a “WARRANT” to gain personal private records…

IMHO, we should do like we do to the child molesters and require anyone who is found guity of reaching a certain level of “physically” harming or abusing others - to be forced to “register” themselves in both the place they live, AND to their prospective employers. This would remove the need for background checks, and would relieve the pressures put on those who are guilty of non-violent crimes who need to support their families.

If we did this in America, it would lighten the load of prisons because non-violent cons will have a reason to excel… It would reduce illegal immigration because there would be less demand for labor, as the ex-cons would fill the gap… It would improve the infrastructure of inner city ghettos, would decrease gangs, would decrease drugs, and would decrease crime in every way.

I got a DUI in my personal vehicle back in '08 and lost my job. I work on the high voltage lines so I need a CDL (commercial DL) to accept a job from the Union. Now that I finally got my CDL back, I’ve been fired because the employer told me that if I had a DUI in the past 5 years I cannot work…

So my career is put on hold for 5 years and I’m not even a trucker… :shrug:

I mean if my Driving record was that bad, then they would not have given me my CDL back in the first place, right… :shrug:

Especially after all the counseling and madd classes and defensive driving and 1 year suspension, and breathelizer device installed in my car, etc, etc, etc… I’ve jumped through enough hoops.

As has been mentioned before, the FOIA applies to information held by government entities.

But many non-government entities also store publicly available information. Google, for example, and news organizations, and others. Do an internet search for an individual and you will find many private companies offering to provide information about individuals for a fee. Those companies are not affected by FOIA.

Again I am very sorry you can’t find work, but this would have been discoverable in a background check even before FOIA, if I am not mistaken. (Criminal records/court documents etc. always have been except for minors).

To those who have been fired or denied a job, your only recourse is to find a lawyer who will expunge or seal your documents. You have paid your debt to society and it should not haunt you the rest of your life.

On the other hand, the other purpose of the FOIA is to keep citizens informed because without being able to check on what our government has been doing, we could wind up in a difficult situation in the future. I don’t fear the government but I do think those who run the country need to be held accountable.

Regarding secrets related to the national defense, it becomes more difficult. There appears to be no way to know if what is being kept secret, in some cases, not most, is an actual secret or some embarrassing incident that certain people want hidden.

God bless,
Ed

Yes, it can be turned bad on people with records. However, without this, the government could hide ANYTHING they wanted, and not tell us about it. It needs to be modified, not repealed

Well, you drove while you were drinking or drunk, and that’s a problem. The problem is not the freedom of information act, but that you violated the terms the company has set up for hiring (ie, not to hire people who’ve had DUI’s in the previous 5 years). Suppose they didn’t have that rule, and someone who had a history of drinking caused *someone else *to die while working on high-voltage lines? The company could be sued for having hired that person. They have to protect themselves.

It would be a public record, so yes. It would have been available to anyone who cared to look for it. Your problem is not with the freedom of information act. Your arrest record, as I said is a public record available even before FOIA. Your problem isn’t even with the government. You’ve paid your penalty to them, that’s why you got your CDL back. Your problem is with private employers who have created their own hiring standards and for many that is 5 years without a DUI, DWI

This is seriously not a privacy issue.

You were guaranteed a speedy and public trial for your offense. It wasn’t a option. And it is as much for the protection of the public as it is for yours. The public has a right to know who has offended.

I’m sorry you’re finding the consequences of your actions so onerous. And I do think we might have gone overboard on DUIs.

But getting rid of the FOIA won’t help you or others like you.

Hah…! I was in my personal vehicle on my OWN time… If what you say is true, then airline pilots, heavy equipment operators, or anyone who operates any machine at all should lose their job too if caught driving “intoxicated”…

After all, I’ve certainly never operated a commercial vehicle intoxicated… Thats the whole problem… And dont tell me that you’ve never left a family barbeque after having a couple of drinks… Odds are you probably have.

The only use I have for operating a commercial vehicle is for the purpose of using the hydraulic bucket.

And like I said, if my driving record was that bad, the feds would never have given me my CDL license back in the first place, since a second DUI banns you from holding a CDL for life.

My problem with posts like yours, is that you and a handful of others prefer to cater to the companies and corporations before lending a helping hand to simple people like me. That is the real problem…!! :mad:

Excellent point, but the fact is that it was the govornment that originally made the information public to begin with… Dosen’t it boil down to the FOIA in the first place which enabled the private companies to gain this information to begin with…?

Would’nt it be better for everyone if peoples personal information was kept private - that is, unless they are a danger towards others…?

I have no problem with sexual offenders, or those who commit violent acts towards others to have to “register”…

But leave the rest of us normal people alone. :shrug:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.