"In America today, the spread of ideas and content has increased in volume, speed, and impact. This can largely be attributed to the advent of the internet. This ability to instantly interact with people anywhere in the world has allowed for immense progress, but can also pose a moral and legal quandary about its use and presence. Should our government be able to monitor our actions for the ""common good""? Or should Americans ' Constitutional rights remain protected from government encroachment? I believe in the latter.
A government functioning within the norms of democracy does not have the obligation to monitor the internet, or at least any more than it already does. The internet serves as everything from an outlet for creative expression to an information accessing tool for millions. Although it can and is used to promote or perform illegal activities, we cannot choke the liberties of the American people in order to weed out the few wrongdoers. Observing internet activity is akin to the function of a police state, disrespecting the fundamental rights of Americans. If the internet is a reflection of our real lives, isn 't it obvious government monitoring is an invasion of our privacy? Although the Constitution does not explicitly state our right to privacy, the legal precedent (through several Supreme
…show more content…
As the internet becomes a crucial entity in our everyday lives, it should remain free of intrusion and censorship from the state to safeguard our liberties. Independence of thought and action has been a hallmark of the American way, an example to other countries for nearly 250 years. Keeping track of internet use is contrary to the spirit of our government and Constitution. Whether it be the practicality, legality, or principle of watching the digital actions of the American people, our entitlement to liberty should extend to protect us as private