Posted on 11/10/2008 1:31:05 PM PST by Conservative Coulter Fan
That’s evil, pure and simple.
Robert Bork has clearly demonstrated that SCOTUS merely created a vague and loosely “right to privacy,” which has produced even more atrocious rulings like Roe v. Wade. Roe wasn’t even a legal attempt in the 51 page opinion of the chief justice.
There is a confusion over the language and the use of the word "Privacy". In the legal context it does not mean personal and discrete behavior, in means an area of life that is non-public. In this context a right to privacy exists whenever the public institution of the government is not empowered or is prohibited to act. The constitution does not give the federal government authority over certain acts or behavior done in "private" between consenting adults. In fact, the 10 Amendment prohibits the federal government from expanding its powers beyond those specifically permitted is in the Constitution. Neither of us may like that behavior, but toleration of it is preferable to an all intrusive, self justifying federal government. If you are looking for redress you should look to the states.
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.