Yeah, and you see dead people, too. As with the Supreme Court, you infer a "right to privacy" when it comes to only one type of activity -- homosexual sodomy.
How is the "right to privacy" protected by the state or the federal government if we substitute gambling, or prostitution or drugs for homosexual sodomy? Why isn't this elusive "right to privacy" that you "see" protected in other activities that take place by consenting adults behind closed doors?
That's some constitutional "right" you see -- it covers activities that I can count on one hand with two fingers left over.
Not at all. I believe in the same right to privacy for everyone. I believe a married couple can do what they will in the privacy of their homes, and the same goes for homosexual couples. No more, no less. As long as that activity does not involve otherwise prohibited activities such as making a bomb, or endangering others, or conspiracy, the home is inviolate, without probable cause.
How is the "right to privacy" protected by the state or the federal government if we substitute gambling, or prostitution or drugs for homosexual sodomy? Why isn't this elusive "right to privacy" that you "see" protected in other activities that take place by consenting adults behind closed doors?
If a state has probable cause that illegal activities are occurring, the right to privacy may be breached, as stated in the 4th Amendment. But the police bear the responsibility to not only demonstrate probably cause, but that the activity is one that does not deserve any right to privacy. Sexual acts between two consenting adults does deserve a right to privacy. Bomb making does not. Use of illegal substances would not be protected as a "right" as long as probable cause justified the invasion.
That's some constitutional "right" you see -- it covers activities that I can count on one hand with two fingers left over.
Not at all, in fact. Any activity that is not otherwise prohibited falls within the scope of privacy when done in the home. That's as it should be. Would you accept the police coming into your home and looking around just for the hell of it? Is not your dinner table or your den no less inviolate than your bedroom? You have created a trap for yourself in your constitutional argument. If heterosexuals have a right to privacy, then by default so do homosexuals, since the right to certain privacy is a right for all, or for none. If you exclude homosexuals, you now deny them both due process and the equal protection of the law under the 14th Amendment.