To protect and serve

I finally got around to watching "The Da Vinci Code" and, though I'll refrain from commenting on the movie itself for now, there was a line that has stuck in my head since: "We are what we protect." This statement, though fairly inconsequential to the plot, holds a profound message when taken in the context of government-citizen relations and human motivation. \nWe are what we protect. Since being struck by that thought while still slightly doped up on tryptophan, I've been pondering the idea of protection. My own working definition of protection is the investment of life, comfort and/or various other resources in pursuit of the well-being of something outside the conscious self. \nGovernments throw the concept of protection around with little consideration of the gravity of its meaning or the responsibility embedded in such a promise. We were hurried into a war on the grounds of protection of our freedoms. The aforementioned freedoms were subsequently taken away in order to perpetuate that war. The government watchdogs, journalists, are being punished in the name of liberty for doing their jobs. Rights guaranteed by our Constitution are continuously being chipped away in the name of protection of freedom.\nBuying into the notion of governmental protection requires a weighing of priorities. I, personally, value individual freedoms -- the choice to love who I will, ascribe to the ideas I desire, invest my money as I see fit and be privy to all the information necessary to make wise decisions -- over allowing the government to make those decisions for me in the name of protection. Others disagree and believe that the "protection" of country is paramount and worth the sacrifice of any rights. For those people, I refer back to the well-known Ben Franklin quote: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." This is a country built on freedoms. If our rights are taken away, we are no longer the America we hope to protect. When American freedoms are negated in the name of safety, it's not protection at all but rather a dangerous change to the very fabric of our country. If truly motivated by an urge to protect, as opposed to a hunger for systemic permanence, our government actors will work to preserve the Constitution, not chip away at it.\nIt's up to you to determine what protection means in the sphere of your own goals, and what's worth the sacrifice to protect, as you become who you will be. It's also your call as to what role our government should play in the protection of the electorate and what rights can justifiably be stripped from us in the name of protection. In your own personal quest for meaning, however, remember that if you love this country and value living in the "free world," then no sacrifice, including life and the status quo, will be too great in the defense of America's most beautiful founding element: the freedoms protected by our Constitution.