Occasionally I like to stir up discussion, so here goes:
Lately, all the president’s men and all the president’s activists have tended to preoccupy themselves with granting terrorists Miranda rights, bringing them to the U.S. for trial in civilian court, and railing against underwear being placed on the heads of detainees in Guantanamo Bay, I began to think… Our founding documents prohibit the government from depriving anyone of their God-given civil and human rights without the due process of law. Terrorists are neither U.S. citizens protected under our Constitution and the Geneva Convention specificially does not apply to terrorists or saboteurs, as they are not considered prisoners of war.
My question, then, is this: Do terrorists have human rights, and why? What documents, or moral code justifies that they have more human rights than, say, a dog? After all, one can forfeit rights to life, liberty or property based upon choosing to violate the social contract we live under, which I would presume would extend to not blowing up innocents for the purpose of making a political statement. I know this blog is new, but I encourage anyone who is reading this to weigh in. I enjoy dissent, even if you are wrong.