<post type="devils-advocate">
Your point made here is nothing but a pure combination of reduction to the absurd and the slippery slope fallacy...
I mean, are you saying that you believe that the people given the authority to invade your privacy always have good intentions? Because I don't believe that.
In the real world, these authorities are often driven by pressure to "find something", or to "make a quota", or to "prove our worth". And the results often harm innocent people.
>(1) if you really believe that, then you would have no problem with a group of strangers searching your house, your bank records, safety deposit boxes, all your digital assets, etc.
No, actually I wouldn't, because there's an entire freakin' universe of difference between cops searching your house, destroying things, having your neighbors wonder WTF is going on and having an open profile on a social network (which is what that oft-maligned quote was talking about)
Someone digging through your possessions (and strip searching your family, feckin' seriously?) is kind of not even similar to an email being picked up by an automated computer system.
That email is stored. It is cataloged. It is cross referenced with every other email that is sent. It is referenced with every crime that is investigated that even remotely has the same keywords as that mail. It is indexed in relation to those you associate with and those they associate with. It is used to create a profile of every little subversive or thing you may ever be tangentially associated with and used against you.
This bill allows it to be done warentless because otherwise a warrent would be required.
To relate this to what you choose to put on a social networking site is not even in the same ballpark as what the NSA is doing here.