This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Agile Buzz
by James Robertson.
Original Post: A Call for a "Right to Privacy" Amendment
Feed Title: Richard Demers Blog
Feed URL: http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/rssBlog/rademers-rss.xml
Feed Description: Richard Demers on Smalltalk
Andrew Sullivan, in this posting, quotes an unnamed lawyer that the proposed amendment to define marriage is really just the first step in an attack by the religious right on the concept of a constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy. The problem is that a "right to privacy" is not clearly spelled out in the Constitution, but instead has been inferred by the courts over a series of decisions.
The Taliban-ish wing of the Evangelical party has a strategy and they are working hard to enact it. Should those of us who value personal liberty and privacy over authoritarian repression let the theocrats have their own way? If not, then what should we do?
The wrong thing to do is to let them control what we talk about. Instead, we need to set our own strategy and pursue it with even greater vigor. And to do this, we need to clearly state our own goals based on what we value. The authors of the Constitution knew that certain rights had to be guaranteed to everyone or they would be trampled by whatever elite is currently in power. That's why we have the Bill of Rights. They went as far they could given their knowledge of history and philosophy, but two hundred years have past and we now know of other ways we can be threatened by religious autocrats.
So how about an amendment guaranteeing personal privacy.
I'm not a lawyer and I'm certainly not competent to draft such an amendment, but it should include some of the following (straight from a dictionary):
privacy: A state of being private; withdrawal from public view or company; seclusion. A place of seclusion; retreat; solitude; retirement. Secrecy; concealment of what is said or done.
private: Not open to, intended for, or controlled by the public. Away from public view. Not known to the public; secret; confidential.
I'm not advocating any absolute right to privacy. Only the simple minded think in terms of absolutes. There is no absolute right to free speech and religious belief, and there can be no absolute right to privacy. People's rights come into conflict with each other and with social needs. That's why it is against the law to yell "fire" in a crowded theater, and why the courts have occasionally mandated medical treatment for the children of religious fanatics. It's the job of the courts and legislatures to define the limits to those rights, but free speech and religious belief are guaranteed by the Constitution to be the norm by which the government must treat its citizens.
It's time to put privacy on a par with other rights we have come to expect, and have it guaranteed by a Constitutional Amendment.
Previous Topic
