Except that this is NOT Ben Franklin’s answer, as he was never asked. You claim that he would be against a DNA database, but do you know? Not really. So I think that you should refrain from attributing his support to your cause.
Honestly, I still cannot see any threat being caused by a DNA database. The government has no desire to clone you or anyone you know. They do, however, want to catch criminals - which is a legitimate reason to have a DNA database.
So you say. But if that worked then there would be no accidents.
Years ago, my car was broad-sided by a woman who ran a red light. I wonder if her logic was similar, if she thought she would stop if she saw a car coming. Well, there I was, and she did not stop. It is just the providence of God that I was not injured.
All I know I had six relatives murdered in Auschwitz by a government with too much power. This happened before I was born. You don’t think things like that could happen here?
It could, but that does not mean that a DNA database would lead to it. You have to apply a reasonable standard to this.
Remember: Abuse does not negate rightful use.
So…for instance…just because there are incidents of police brutality does not mean we should abolish all police.
I remember in Chicago a lady yelled at and said what she thought to President Clinton, later on that night the Secret Service busted down her front door with local police and hauled her and her husband off to jail. Yeah they were released but the government had no right to do that.
What about Mayor Nagin and Police Chief Riley of New Orleans, LA in the travesty that occurred in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina… (If you’ve forgotten how the Second Amendment was trampled upon following Hurricane Katrina, law abiding citizens their guns taken away and some hauled off to jail for owning a gun! Or if you have friends or family members who still naively believe “it can’t happen here” well it can and did.
You ask about “what if” well these last two examples are not “if’s” I didn’t imagine them it happened by government officials using power thay didn’t have.
So no to taking DNA without permission I don’t trust all these government officials. I think you’re over estimating the trust you have in government.
I will not give up mine or my children’s liberty and civil rights that easily.
These incidents, which happened without any involvement of DNA, do not form an argument against a DNA database.
There are important facts which need to be addressed and are not:
The primary use of a government DNA database is in criminal investigations. Therefore, it is used to save lives.
There is no inherent violation of the dignity of the human person in having a DNA database.
It is reasonable for you to be concerned about the well-being of yourself and your family. However, I am also concerned with that of myself and mine. And given that is the case, I would very much like the police to be able to catch serial killers and serial rapists as quickly as possible.
The point was merely being made that we cannot sacrifice our individual liberties for the cause of safety. You see no threat to this - many said the same thing of other legislation (see prior post) that has been passed since 2006. One lone senator (Patrick Leahy) was even quoted as saying that the language of one of these bills “subverts” the Constitution. Up until this past June, when the courts ruled it unconstitutional, our right to Habeas Corpus was rescinded by the MCA. Posse Comitatus has virtually been re-written by the NDAA. The noose is tightening as they keep chipping away at the Bill of Rights. I am more afraid of my freedom being taken away and living in a police state than I am of ordinary criminals. Our rule of the land is unique and I want to continue living in a Constitutional Republic.
God Bless America and may He protect us from what may come to pass if the politicians, who no longer represent We the People, have their way!
The problem is that you are not backing up your assertions logically here.
Here is what you need to prove:
A DNA database violates the constitution.
A DNA database is detrimental to our civil rights.
Both of those points remain unproven. If you want to try to relate a DNA database to these other things, then you need to show how they relate. The fact of the matter is that the government does have a legitimate reason to exercise power in certain cases. So you need to show why this is not legitimate, not simply point out that the government has abused power in the past.
As to being more afraid of the government than criminals…well… at this point, you are still far more likely to be victimized by a criminal than you will by the government. Simply look at the statistics of violent crime in the United States.
Once again, I return to what I said in an earlier post: Abuse does not negate proper use.
Just because the government can abuse power does not negate the necessity of an ordered, law-based society.
Is it intrinsically evil for the government to collect such data? No, not at all.
For those employing the argumentum ad Hitlerium, consider that Social Security numbers could be used to argue the same things of government keeping track of things and leading to abuse.
Steeltemplar is quite right. Abusus non tollit usum. Whether the practice is used for good or evil depends on the government, not on the existence of the database.
Let us not appeal to fear here. If you have solid reasons as to why this is an intrusion by the government as it now stands, then give them. Otherwise recognize that it is our responsibility to ensure the government we have does not become the one we fear, and recognize that the government we fear will not be caused by the DNA database, and the government we fear can control us quite well without it.
There are serious legal, ethical and self-determination implications to government-imposed
The parent/patient right of consent for medical testing is a long-established legal right.
Genetic tests are only predictive, but many erroneously consider them presumptive.
Results are entered in child’s medical record which could enable future discrimination.
Studies find false positives cause long-term anxiety in parents.
Blood and test results held by the State are considered government property, available for
whatever purposes future legislatures might choose.
Not everyone wants to know about their health future—or let others know about it.
H.R. 3825 will expand newborn genetic testing, initiate identification of secondary conditions,
place more individuals into government tracking systems, build intrusive government treatment
monitoring and follow-up programs, strengthen claims of government ownership to the DNA and
genetic information of citizens, make research subjects of citizens, and violate the citizens’ right
to “not know/not tell” their genetic predispositions. The proposed legislation does not
acknowledge or uphold the rights of citizens to be free from government genetic testing,
government surveillance and government-conducted or government-supported genetic research.
I contend that this bill violates privacy issues, although I will concede that the Constitution does not contain an express right to privacy. I think that the entire issue of whether the Constitution protects privacy in ways not expressly provided in the Bill of Rights is controversial and will continue to be defined. This is one of those gray areas in which the courts will eventually have to decide.
But every red flag is waving in my face over this. It certainly violates my idea of common sense on the matter. You don’t mind that your parental rights will be infringed upon by mandatory governmental genetic testing? My child’s DNA can be held as government property? The most personal aspects of my child’s make-up will be posted on a database? For what purpose do they need this and how much further will they go? Don’t you see the dangers and where this can lead especially in terms of pro-life issues? We are the ones responsible for holding government accountable and the way I see it, this is way over the top in terms of an over-reaching Congress.
This is becoming such a familiar theme as of late. Government tracking, government surveillance, increasing government control over our very lives! Welcome to the USSA! United States Socialist America. The original intent and spirit of the Constitution argued for less government, not more! The power was intended to be in the hands of the people. Too bad Thomas Jefferson is dead. It would be interesting to hear what he might have to say.
and the government we fear can control us quite well without it.
This is exactly my point when Social Security was enacted it was against the law to use it for identification when I was fourteen years old I got my SS card on the bottom of the card in bold print “Will not be used for identification purposes” look at your card today that statement is not on the card.
I say again give the government an inch they will take one hundred miles. It’s not about the DNA database it’s being forced to give it up.
I can’t believe people are stating they want to enact forced DNA I could see if you were born in another country where they don’t have a Bill of Rights but Americans are saying this? Unbelievable! Please don’t be a sheep.
Actually I’m not. I would bet a large sum of money that I know a LOT more about what can be done with DNA than you do. I also think that you are just as guilty of letting your imagination run rampant. A very small percentage of Americans are actually the victim of any type of crime that DNA evidence can help with.
Of course you are free to give your DNA to anyone you want. As for me, I will keep mine just as the good Lord intended.
…Garza said this is the first time the county will proceed with this type of practice, which he said is successful in larger cities, such as Houston, that have the resources to commit.
“For individuals who are driving while intoxicated who refuse to take the breath test, we will use the legal authority to obtain a warrant for their blood,” Garza said. "We’re serious about DWIs in Bell County, and with me today are the local representatives and chiefs for this county…
Please do not be insulting by calling names like “sheep”. Do I say things like “Don’t be a paranoid conspiracy theorist?” No. So please extend the same courtesy.
The problem with the arguments against a DNA database here is that they do not address what is actually wrong with it.
So far, the argument I see set forth is that if you give the government power then they abuse it. However, I am sure we can all agree that the government does need to have some authority. So what you need to prove is that the DNA database is more power than they should have.
I was not calling anyone personally a sheep I said don’t be one as giving up your civil rights without questioning it. If you don’t see a problem with being forced to give up your DNA I feel sorry for you.
The point of the story from the KDH is that people will be forced to give up blood on the opinion of a police officer.
Whatever happened to being innocent until proven guilty?
Check the link below I’m not the only one that sees this as a violation of civil rights. Be it blood or DNA this is taking away our rights.
Foes think blood draws violate freedom
Posted on: Thursday, January 01, 2009, 5:08 AM
what a name for a bill - “saves lives”. and what is the point where they say that a child has too many inherited aliments? will they truly “save” that child? or will it be deemed too costly for society? will a newborn not achieve personhood now until its genetic screening is completed??? this is just an awful law.
I do think that one should not underestimate the seriousness and importance of this move to increase mandatory screening. These 29 metabolites are just the tip of the iceberg and when genomic knowledge is added and the DNA screening can be done, we will see a massive increase in screening and it, therefore, behooves somebody, a body like this to at least consider whether there are ethical questions beyond saying proceed with caution and to see whether there is some kind of positive intellectual contribution that one could make just sorting out those questions.
This is so disturbing to me! I think of upmost importance is the fact that parental consent has totally been obliviated. See what they are doing? To my way of thinking, this is similar to what happened in the Lexington school system when the Christian parents could not opt out of the class their kindergartner was taking that was using the gay fairytale as a way of indoctrinating their child to homosexuality.