Posted on 08/17/2006 1:02:27 PM PDT by Peach
"You believe that the Bill of Rights is an exhaustive list of rights retained by the People?"
No I do not think the Bill of Rights is exhaustive. I just don't think a right to privacy is inclusive. If it was, there would be no reason to have a legislative branch of Government, since no laws could be made that would not infringe on privacy, if it was considered a right. Also, there would be no need for an executive branch of government, since no laws could be enforced. Add to that, there would be no need for a judicial branch to interpret laws, since all would be unconstitutional based on privacy rights.
I think the meaning of the term "rights" needs to be defined based on the rights in the other amendments in the Bill of Rights.
On that I agree 100%. I don't understand how anyone could believe that the constitution of the United States should apply to those that aren't citizens.
Somebody's in big trouble if they are, as it is private information.
Most of the info I said was on the net is on https sites run by the military. If there is anything I don't want others to see, I can ask that specific info to be deleted from the sites.
Hey, don't you remember that the DemocRATS said all we had to do was ASK and the administration would get everything we needed to fight terrorism. Yeah, right....
But suppose they ignored your requests to delete.
And why would you be requesting to delete anyhow if you want to be the paragon of fish bowls. C'mon, post your name address and SSN right here on FR.
It was first famously put into words by Justice Louis Brandeis, who talked about "a right to be left alone." It's based on the Constitution being a limit to government, not the people, and privacy being inherent in the 3rd, 4th, & 5th Amendments, which are useless without the idea of personal privacy behind them.
It is just your kind of thinking that caused fear of the Bill of Rights -- that an enumeration of rights would lead people to think that those were all the rights that existed.
"It's based on the Constitution being a limit to government, not the people, and privacy being inherent in the 3rd, 4th, & 5th Amendments, which are useless without the idea of personal privacy behind them."
Then why didn't the founders put an explicit right to privacy in the bill of rights, rather than putting portions into 3 different amendments. Clearly, from the 3rd, 4th and 5th amendments they were thinking of some need for privacy. They could have spelled that out if that was what they intended, unless they intended to explicitly not put in a carte blanche right to privacy.
This is exactly what I was talking about, the fear of some Founding Fathers that enumerating certain rights would have people assuming that those are all the rights that existed. That was the reason for the 9th Amendment, a catch-all for any rights that they automatically assumed, but did not explicitly put into the Bill of Rights.
For example, the right to have children isn't in the Constitution, so why do we let people do it? We consider freedom of travel to and from this country to be a basic right, but I don't remember that in the Constitution either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.