The term 'civil liberties' doesn't allow for a 'no limits' option.
The term 'civil' tells us the liberties referred to are of paramount importance to the community and their scope is limited to, or decided by, the community in question. For a soft example, in some communities it is fine to go out with no head-covering; in others it isn't. That's easy to follow and harms nobody. In some communities, for a hard example, it is fine for family members to beat or kill men, women and children for perceived infringements of family or cultural rules; this is an infringement of the injured parties liberties.
A total lack of limits on the liberty of any citizen to do whatever they liked at any given moment for any reason or no reason at all would result in anarchy.
Anarchy is a situation where no governmental or social controls exist. In an anarchical situation any sense of community or personal responsibility does not exist and no personal responsibility is taken for any actions against members of the community involved. In a fairly short time that community will cease to exist, without survivors, or with very, very few. This has been shown for many decades by researchers.
In any civil society the community must be continually aware the notion of civil liberty is a vital part of their existence. Once one accepts the notion liberties accorded to some might not apply to others one accepts that civil liberties apply only to oneself. This concept isn't anarchy, but it does erode the humanity of every single member of that community, regardless of their status within that community.
So, we must retain a concious awareness of the rights of every single person to enjoy the liberty life should allow them. As the American Declaration of Independence demanded, every human owns the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
When we seek, as we continually do, to ensure this is the right of every person, we are seeking enforcement of civil liberties. By definition, we cannot possibly seek a 'no limits' situation on this because that might easily deny the civil liberties of others.
Civil liberties have no limits, but they come with built-in respect for the civil liberties of every other human in our global or local community.
For some reason, I would say that it still Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. Based on square mileage of the city limits.
All of the Homeless People would live on the streets and annoy people
pusssy cx
States don't usually provide limits, but communities do. You would have to check your local ordinances. Most places limit it in towns or cities. There may be restrictions based on animal abuse rights.
I would suggest that not most but some. Yet, the fact that they are homeless shows that something happen in their life and that they need help.
somthing will happen If there were no limits on civil liberties, people would have more freedom. People would still feel constrained from certain activities due to societal pressure and cultural norms.
somthing will happen If there were no limits on civil liberties, people would have more freedom. People would still feel constrained from certain activities due to societal pressure and cultural norms.
Yes. But this would not protect the person who goes beyond the limits in the US Constitution from prosecution in Federal Court. What the states may not do is impose more restrictive limits on civil liberties or civil rights than those in the US Constitution.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is probably the most well known, though some would argue that their fight for civil liberties actually impedes on others.
One example of abusing a person's civil liberties, or human rights, would be to use slander to ruin someone else's reputation. Others would be discriminating, profiling, and the taking away of ones life.
nothing would had happened.
Examples of civil liberties would be the five freedoms that are mentioned in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution; speech, press, religion, assembly, and petition.
Spanish regain civil liberties
Do we even want to begin to think of what life would be like? Civil liberties are here to protect all American citizens. With as much violence and hatred that still exists in America, civil liberties is protection from that violence and hatred. For starters racism STILL exists in America. Racial discrimination still exists as well. Now we have sexual discrimination and discrimination based up a chosen sexuality. Without those civil liberties there would be countless numbers of death, an increased rate of crime, the continuous prejudice against whomever via mass media, religion would cease to be a place of humane equality. Religious institutions would only house those who are completely indulged in the faith. Homosexuals would be beaten and abused on higher scales. I'm sure discrimination against African Americans and other minorities will be on the rise as well. America needs civil liberties to protect everyday people.
The president does not have the power to unilaterally suspend civil rights or liberties in the United States. The suspension of civil rights would require an act of Congress or a declaration of martial law by the president, under limited circumstances. However, even in those situations, the suspension would be subject to legal challenges and constitutional scrutiny.
there will be no peace
There would be no Civil War