[AndyJackson]

But wouldn't taking the other side in Griswold ential also assuming that a state has the power to outlaw premarital sex as well?

In fact, without Griswold, what would stop the State of CT from outlawing post marital sex altogether and not just some old-fashioned ideas of what what and what was no allowable between the marriage sheets?

I can admit that the question of how you get from Griswold to abortion is legitimate and I can even admit that how you get from right to privacy to prying open the pharmacies to sell products that the laws of the state prohibit, but the claim that there is no fundamental right to privacy is absurd.

[Piers-the-Ploughman]

just a question if you have time...

Did Griswold outlaw use of contraceptives in the home or the sale of contraceptives? Maybe that's still too much for some but didn't the duly elected representatives vote that law into place? If the people's representatives voted for a law banning sale of contraceptives in CT, why is that bad--remember, this is supposedly how republican government works.

OTOH a law prohibiting their use in private home is effectively unenforceable

[fr_freak]

In fact, without Griswold, what would stop the State of CT from outlawing post marital sex altogether and not just some old-fashioned ideas of what what and what was no allowable between the marriage sheets?

You seem to forget that the legislature of Connecticut, as of all states, is elected by the people. So, what would stop those legislators from doing something that stupid? The voters. The idea is that the more local the government, the closer to the wishes of the people the government becomes. Having a federal judiciary deciding what standards a state can set for itself (which violate no specific clause in the Constitution - just some right found in the penumbras) means that citizens of Connecticut are truly ruled by unelected federal justices rather than their own elected legislators.

[Shalom Israel]

I can even admit that how you get from right to privacy to prying open the pharmacies to sell products that the laws of the state prohibit, but the claim that there is no fundamental right to privacy is absurd.

Define "privacy." When you finally give up, you'll understand why there is no right to "privacy".

[Plutarch]

In fact, without Griswold, what would stop the State of CT from outlawing post marital sex altogether...

Nothing would besides it would be idiotic for a Democratically elected Government to do so. If you want marital relations to be a Constitutional right you can pass a Constitutional Amendment that so specifies. You could include other bodily functions as well. But such a right was not spelled out in the Constitution and the right of privacy has to be derived from penumbras. If you give the Judges the power to divine penumbras you make the Judiciary a Perfect Tyranny.