In the following critical review of "Enemy of the State" I will address the obvious issue of the government's violation of the privacy of United States citizens by the Security Agency national (NSA). However, before doing so, I would like to begin by outlining some initial information that is critical to setting the context in which I will consider the issue of invasion of privacy. I will begin by first giving a brief overview of the United States government and where it initially receives the power to exercise authority over its citizens and its responsibility to us as citizens. I will also briefly discuss our role as citizens and our biblical obligations to government. After that I will provide a brief introduction on how we guaranteed the right to privacy, and then the rest of this article will be dedicated to relating that right to privacy to specific violations within the film. Despite my previous refusal to analyze and criticize this film against a presupposed biblical basis, I would now like to explicitly state my intention to do so in the next part of this critique. I will now give a brief context on where government has its fundamental foundation from a biblical perspective. In the Bible God establishes only three institutes. The first institution ordained by God is marriage, which as we can see is an arrangement that allows two separate human beings, male and female, to enter into a covenant with each other before God in an effort to better fulfill roles that God has established in place for each of them. The second institution that God established is the church. The church is organized in a hierarchical manner to organize its members so that ... middle of paper ... the absolute power that this privacy law would imply. He claimed that the government knew, had recorded and cataloged everything that was on “every cable, every radio wave!” this corruption would be unjustifiably unconstitutional, the issues raised in this film are far beyond the limits of even my generation and require a lifetime of reflection, which sadly is longer than I believe the evidence indicates before the implications of this film become reality. I then conclude with a statement made in the film by Larry King, which succinctly summarizes the very questions that fuel this privacy debate, "how do you draw the line - draw the line between protecting national security, obviously the government's need to obtain information intelligence" of personal data and the protection of civil liberties, in particular the sanctity of my home? You have no right to enter my house!