Why do we need privacy from the government?

I respect your opinion but I do not agree with what you said. Government should have never interfered in the personal data of people why should I grant government any kind of access to my very personal commucinations??? This reminds me of Jeremy Bentham's concept of panopticon. I thik this idea moved beyond just a prison into a system where we all are prisoners.

In my opinion governments should develop other methods to deal with security issues that may arise.

I think that there is a definite limit on the amount of access governments should have to online information. Concentrating that much information in the government or any entity makes it subject to commercial or other types of exploitation.

The problem with allowing the government to monitor your online communications, is that there are many interpretations for what constitutes a threat, and certain interpretations could allow the government to violate the rights of their citizens. For example, if an anti-government activist was reading anti-government content online, the government could percive it as a threat, and arrest the individual. We cannot trust the government with the power to monitor all our online communications and searches, because they will abuse that power to serve their interests.

Governments should have access to public and private communications online with just cause. If a person is posing threats towards others or the government, then the government should have the right to access that information and intervene. I don't believe the government would abuse its power to access information from the public to protect its interests because the government is comprised of three branches and a checks-and-balances system. The actions and interests of the executive branch branch may not necessarily gain support from the legislative branch or approval from the judicial. This ensures that the government does not become absolute or totalitarian, meaning that there is no singular government interest that is not supported by the US Constitution. 

I disagree. Firstly, this is not about the citizenry having something to hide, but the lack of transparency on the government's part. According to the Snowden leaks, high-ranking U.S. Intelligence officials lied to Congress and, by extension, the American people about the depths of its spying programs. Keep in mind, the U.S. government took communication records from major companies such as Verizon and Apple and spy on citizens through their computer cameras without their knowledge or consent. The issue is particularly sensitive in America given the varying interpretations of the 4th amendment, which protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizure by law enforcement. The current dilemma is how technology plays a role. Now look, I understand using wiretaps and surveillance in certain instances. If the FBI wants to prevent hate crimes, terrorist attacks, or mass shooting incidents and sees active groups and individuals repeating past patterns associated with aforementioned criminal activity, then I think it is within their right to investigate using online records. What I truly fear is a slippery slope in which the U.S. will spy on political dissidents who are not committing illegal acts. The FBI did this very thing to Martin Luther King, Jr. They monitored him for his political activism and wanted to discover whether or not he had communist sympathies. I cannot imagine how the Intelligence Community will abuse their power with cybersecurity in play. The root of the problem for me is distrust between the government and citizens, and I think it is the government's responsibility to foster greater trust through transparency and consent.