Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AndyJackson
Try all you want, when you argue that there is no right to privacy, you and I part ways.

I missed the post where you defined privacy in such a way that we know what things you're allowed to do in "your castle" without government interference, but which also accounts for the fact that murdering someone in "your castle" can be illegalized. If you tried, you would of course realize that "private" really means, "The government can't ban anything I don't want them to ban," which is of course circular. For example:

For instance, I believe that sexual practices between consenting adults are a matter of privacy covered under a right to privacy...

You appear to be claiming that Washington and Jefferson legalized prostitution. I have the darndest feeling you're wrong about that.

The issue of prostitution normally comes into court because of public solicitation, not what happens in the privacy of one's home.

Okay, I wasn't imagining it--you really do have the idea that the framers legalized prostitution. That's checkable, you know. We should have plenty of case law illustrating the Constitutional protection of voluntary prostitution conducted in non-public places.

No one has argued the the right to privacy covers the right to commit what all of us would regard as felonies, i.e. rape or murder.

Yup, that's the circular reasoning thing I warned you about. "The right to privacy means I have a right to do anything that I should be allowed to do in private." In other words, "the government can't outlaw anything it can't outlaw." Try defining what those things are. Be chagrined.

134 posted on 10/19/2005 5:06:09 PM PDT by Shalom Israel (How's that answer? Can I be a nominee to SCOTUS? I can give better answers than Ms. Miers...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies ]


To: Shalom Israel
I like your reply, but what's with your tagline?

I think I'll wait for the showdown between Shalom Israel and Harriet Miers, before I make up my mind about your qualifications vs hers.

140 posted on 10/19/2005 5:11:28 PM PDT by shhrubbery! (The 'right to choose' = The right to choose death --for somebody else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies ]

To: Shalom Israel
Well, you may find a right to privacy circular and confusing, and therefore claim that I have none, but if you invade my privacy, I can sue you for it in a court of law.

I think your problem is that you find what goes on in your wildest imaginings of what goes on in other people's bedrooms to be offensive and so you hope that you can pass a law against it.

Every right that we have ends at the beginning of the other guy's noses. I don't think this one is different, and that is not such an unclear concept that it should invalidate this one. For instance, murder, rape, etc. clearly violate someone else's right.

But like I said, I suspect that the problem is that your nose is stuck too close into other folks business and so it is likely to get bent out of shape or smell foul things. Worry about your own problems and you won't have that problem.

146 posted on 10/19/2005 5:18:06 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson