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

To: wagglebee
"Roe v. Wade is one. There is nothing in the Constitution about the right to abortion," the associate justice explained.

One might argue that your right of privacy in your papers and property extended to a womans body. Ok. So then my right of privacy also should extend to the substances I put into my body, which means that all drug laws should be null and void.

Yeah. When pigs fly.

15 posted on 10/17/2007 3:53:55 PM PDT by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: narby

The 14th amendment has given excuse for every liberal in this country to redefine the constitution and rewrite it. I heard of a case back during FDR, when they were trying to control the amount of grains produced by farmers. They alledged the interstate commerce clause was their constitutional excuse. The farmer said he raised corn to feed his pigs and cattle, and his family and none was shipped across state lines. The court ruled they still could regulate his volumn of production. They just took his rights away by fiat. It is happening every damn day in every walk of life and we say nothing. Not one damn thing do we say any more. What a crying shame. The government is what the judiciary, and legislative and excutive leaders say it is. They take an oath to uphold the constitution and then systematically set out to destroy it. And it is in tattered rags my friend. It is nearly shreaded to an unrecognizable rag. That precious progenitor of freedom. What a crying shame.


67 posted on 10/17/2007 5:33:28 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: narby
One might argue that your right of privacy in your papers and property extended to a womans body. Ok. So then my right of privacy also should extend to the substances I put into my body, which means that all drug laws should be null and void.

The absolutist "right to privacy" is only applied in the sexual context. The SCOTUS believes in sexual liberation and so wants to ban any limitations on sex. In every other situation, the SCOTUS only cares about privacy in the 4th Amendment context.

88 posted on 10/17/2007 6:43:57 PM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: narby

Read it again. Even though the Supreme Court has misinterpreted our Constitution to discover some non-existent ‘right to privacy’, such a right is NOT mentioned in our Constitution. Nor, may I add, is anything approaching ‘separation of church and state’.


123 posted on 10/18/2007 6:23:40 AM PDT by SlayerOfBunnies (An Indian friend of mine wishes to remind everyone... Indians <> muslims)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | 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