[RightWhale]

The right to life is also in doubt with the TS case. The case of private property is ducked in the 5th Amendment. it is something already there. That is the major source of the problem in the western states. The Mining Law of 1876 was passed to clarify property rights, but private ownership in all western states seems to be at the pleasure of the Fed Gov through mining claims, homestead claims, and townsites. Patent could be withdrawn at any time as the Fed Gov has the ultimate Right of Way everywhere.

[AntiGuv]

The only doubt regards the boundaries of the right, which is what I said before. What would you concede as an explicit acknowledgment of private property rights? I imagine it'd be something like this:

"The right to private ownership of property shall not be abridged."

That is exactly what the Framers have stated by their formulation. With other words, they have said the following: 'The right to private property shall not be abridged except...'

There is no other rational way to read the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

[AntiGuv]

The only doubt regards the boundaries of the right, which is what I said before. What would you concede as an explicit acknowledgment of private property rights? I imagine it'd be something like this:

"The right to private ownership of property shall not be abridged."

That is exactly what the Framers have stated by their formulation. With other words, they have said the following: 'The right to private property shall not be abridged except...'

There is no other rational way to read the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

[AntiGuv]

PS. Please do me a favor and don't bring up the Terri Schiavo case to me. Most people around here lose all sense of reason and logic when discussing that and I just don't want to go there anymore.

[newgeezer]

The right to life is also in doubt with the TS case.

That case had little if anything to do with the right to life. It had everything to do with deciding who speaks for a person when that person is unable to speak for herself.