Saturday, March 04, 2006

More Constitutional Imagination The notion of Privacy

Most of you know my positions on homosexuality and abortion. In an ideal world people should be left alone as much as possible. Gays should not be persecuted or be given extra rights. We all have a right to be fleeced on April 15 every year.

My problem with the focus of the law is the placement of imaginary concepts into law and the problem with incrementalism. The current dogma is that one has a "right to privacy ". No you are protected from baseless searches. Mark Levin goes through the history of incrementalism of this absurd notion.

Do I have a right to build a drug lab in my bedroom ? Do I have a right to build an atomic weapon in my bedroom ? Do I have a right to film botanical pornography in my bedroom ?

There has never been a right to commit criminal acts in privacy or public. The last example is legal but a stretch of the imagination. I can see people rushing out to buy Trees behaving badly as we speak. The ultimate example of this insanity are the left wing critics of external radiation sweeps of Mosques in the USA.

The key in any search is probable cause. If Law enforcement has a reasonable suspicion then a warranted search is advisable. Once person X has communicated with terrorist Y probable cause has been established. One can easily make a case that Marxist by definition of who they are and their history have established probable cause generations ago.

The notion of privacy starts in the case Griswald vs Con. The case was about birth control in CT and has been expanded to include every type of behavior. The opinion
of Justice Douglas who would have a Clintonian episode with a flight attendant in the
Supreme Court has been twisted like a pretzel. Justice KKK Black whom the left loves for his imaginary wall between religion and state dissented.

Now this being said I am still a supporter of Gay rights as human rights. Gays should not be persecuted because of their proclivities. Human rights in the Constitution are granted to each one of us by our creator, not some nut in a Black Robe. The notion that the sex police are out there waiting to catch sexual deviants is a farce. However if and when they do a certain Bill from Chapaqua NY should take notice.

I am also pro abortion with plenty of reservations. Partial birth abortion is infanticide and I do not buy the primacy of the doctor line. Partial birth abortion is murder via MD . Some doctors do commit crimes and should not be worshiped more then auto mechanics or plumbers.

The basic point is that the legislature should make laws. The Courts should enforce laws created by the legislature. Sadly we have rouge activists who are dedicated to legislating from the bench. This is not what our founding fathers had in mind.

Beamish in 08, Ducky to be doooooomed at Fenway and 167 MIA DOA RIP

7 comments:

Kyle said...

Let me partialy disagree. Although the Idea of a right to privacy was a bizarre construction of the Scotus to defend the Roe decision. I beleive that there is an implied right to privacy not just in the constitution but in the writings of the Enlightenment which led to the constitution.
Of course it is not the right to break the law or commit a public nuscience. Rather it is a by product of the doctrine of Limited Government. The government basically has no right over the private life of its citizens unless it can demonstrate a compelling state interest.
Abortion is problematic because if you belive that you are protecting a human life then there is certainly a compelling interest. Laws against Gays are far easier. There simply is no interest in the government trying to compell the behavior of private citizens in their personal life.
I would extend this to areas of discourse and commerce. There is no compelling state interest In the government reading our Emails. Unless it is assumed we are either terrorists
or criminals, which is why a court review is necessary.

Always On Watch said...

The following is tangentially related...

Recently, my personal information was put at stake when my accountant's office was burglarized, and the burglars, a ring of thieves which hit every major accountant firm in Northern Virginia, are still at large.

So, I attempted to put a seven-year fraud alert on my credit. I couldn't get it done! The credit agency requires an official police report, but the jurisdiction in which the burglary occurred won't release that report without a court order. Argghhhh!

But you can bet that, if the burglars get caught, THEIR "right to privacy" would be respected.

(Sorry for the whining comment, but I'm damned frustrated. The 90-day alert has expired, and my personal information may well be exposed and exploited).

Robert Bayn said...

I'm against abortion, but support a womans right to choose, but i also feel that choice begins way before she ever is pregnant, i'm totally against partial birth abortions, i should support legislation to ban abortions if there were exceptions for Incest, Rape and the Indangering the life of a mother, right now all new laws banning abortion, do not have all these exceptions, therefore i can not support those laws.

As far as Judicial activism, it is not limited to the left, as a book by a republican stated, the right is guilty of this too. I beleive in putting judges on the court that are first qualified, and second have a history of going by the law and not by political affliations, which is why i was one of a few Liberals that supported both Alito and Roberts to the supreme court.

Warren said...

The "right" to privacy is a slippery thing.

I believe we have an reasonable expectation of privacy but an inalienable "right" to privacy becomes ludicrous in the face of reality.

The IRS requires us to keep records of our finances. In reality, the government cannot even require us to read and write. Should this financial disclosure be declared unconstitutional as an invasion of our "right" to privacy?

Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

I think with new technology (for example the "morning after pill," and other abortifacients) that the abortion issue is going to fade from the scene of American politics. Abortions up to the 7th week of pregnancy can be performed at home with a vaginally inserted pill that causes a miscarriage.

MissingLink said...

Crime generally is committed in "privacy".
Conspiring agains the state from definition requires a lot of privacy.
Tapping of phones - the latest example.
I think the most important point you mafe here:
The basic point is that the legislature should make laws. The Courts should enforce laws created by the legislature.

beakerkin said...

The notion of Privacy is a artificial creation of the activist court. Lets see a leftist defend my right to build an atomic bomb in my bedroom.