The right to privacy is a phantom right dreamed up by William Douglas to justify striking down a Connecticut law banning contraception. It represents mushy legal thinking at best and legislating from the bench at worst.
Having said that, I believe many of the constitutional issues that have been decided on an argument of a right to privacy could easily be decided the same way on more solid legal foundations, which could then put to rest all of the back and forth bickering. My basic reasoning is that our bodies are our own and we are largely free to do as we wish with them. When we begin to test the theoretical boundaries of this right, we quickly run into problems. Do I have the right to walk around naked or perform sex acts in public? most of these questions are easily answered with the core principle that our individual rights extend only to the point that they begin to interfere with the rights of other people. Abortion is obviously the trickiest question of the bunch, because depending on your beliefs, you might consider that there is more than one person involved. In that case, we should just leave it to each woman's conscience. (Minors having abortions is yet another test of the boundaries that is difficult to resolve.) On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Gruss wrote: > tBONE! > > Obama just laid out an important constitutional notion: the right to > privacy is within the constitution and not subject for state > referendum. > > Thoughts? > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:274716 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
