On 12/18/2014 4:25 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
They accepted it out of Puritan theology: that this life is just a test and indulgence
in any pleasure is suspect and possibly a sin. It's the same strain of thought that
wants to ban any recreational drugs, pornography, prostitution, homosexuality,...
But it contradicts the constitution and the human rights. It contradicts the base of the
modern democracies.
No it doesn't. The Constitution didn't say there was a right to privacy and it didn't say
choice of sexual behavior or recreational drugs are a human right. The founders had a
vociferous dispute about the Bill of Rights. One side wanted to spell out rights. The
other side said, no, if you spell them out then those will be all you get. They
compromised by spelling out some and including a clause reserving other rights to the
states or the people. It's interesting that many states have strong privacy provisions in
their state constitutions - which are seldom enforced because it would require a district
attorney to prosecute law enforcement or big financial corporations, since they are most
common abusers of privacy.
The founders also tried to limit the federal (not state) government powers; which have
mostly been expanded by court interpretations of the interstate commerce clause.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
