"If that's your position, then we essentially agree--and you don't believe there's a "right to privacy" after all. I.e., you believe that there is at the federal level but that there is not at the state level."
Well I always was talking about the federal level because we were talking about a USSC Justice. But I take your meaning re the 14th. The States may or may not have their own right of privacy depending on their constitutional history (California explicitly does). I don't believe the federal concept of the right of privacy has ever been imposed on the states through the incorporation doctrine (which I also oppose).
OK, we're good there.
I don't believe the federal concept of the right of privacy has ever been imposed on the states through the incorporation doctrine (which I also oppose).
That's exactly what happened in Griswold: the Constitutional "right to privacy" was interpreted as an affirmative right--derived from the "penumbra" of the first amendment--which, by the fourteenth amendment, was binding upon the states. You can see the text of the ruling here.