Does the Constitution guarantee Americans a right to privacy?

[Rigby5]

There are potentially deadly consequences of using prescription and even OTC drugs as well.

Most intentional suicides by drug employ prescription drugs legally obtained at a pharmacy.

There are potentially deadly consequences to almost everything, like driving a car.
There is no legal basis for government dictating on issues like that which do not infringe upon others.
Suicide is a good example.
At some point, everyone wants to commit suicide.
It is their right.

 

[Rigby5]

Legality is irrelevant to recognizing you're an addict.

Actually it's even easier to do so with illicit drugs since you know you're risking prison every time you buy them.

Wrong.
Addiction is a medical issue so should be beyond the jurisdiction of the police.
If drugs were not criminalized, then additions could much more easily be treated.
Prison does not treat addictions at all, and instead increases drug abuse from those who come out of prison.
Prohibition showed a huge spike in murders, identical to the spike the War on Drugs is currently causing.

 

[HandleTheTruth]

According to the right wing stop and frisk was good policy by right winger Rudy Giuliani.

 

[Rigby5]

No, rape is a form of assault. Sexual assault.

Assault technically is "unconsented touching", and is based on the inherent right of privacy.

 

[OKTexas]

Lies from anywhere can swing an election. That's what the 1st amendment allows.

A conspiracy to suppress the truth is election tampering and is illegal.

.

 

[Rigby5]

Murder and assault are as natural as breeding for humans and they were quite common throughout most of our history in attaining women for that reason.

Morality developed over time as humans agreed to basic rules to live by most of which require us to override our natural instincts.

Being able to do so is the primary behavioral difference between us and Wild Animals.

There's absolutely no evidence supporting your DNA claim and it's utterly ignorant ridiculous and flies in the face of human history.,

Totally wrong.
Murder and assault were uncommon until about 12,000 years ago.
As hunter/gatherers, the men were out hunting and the women ran the tribes.
The basis for human social instincts came from the fact that as arboreal primates, originally we relied on trees for defense.
For whatever reason we came down from the trees, without claws, fangs, speed, or armor, that only thing we have to rely on was group, social, coherence, like empathy.
Same are Meerkats.

After the last ice age melted, things changed that happened way too fast for evolution, and have to be from dysfunctional stress instead. Probably over population and desertification, especially in the Mideast.
That produced a constant war status, male domination instead of female, a fetish for weapons technology, etc.
That is easy to see, because there are literally hundreds of early Mideast societies, each temporarily winning, but destroying themselves through anti-social corruption, but training their successor.
Look at ancient Rome for example.
They would not have existed except that the Greeks beat up on them until the Etruscans learned to be as evil as the Greeks.
Then the Romans beat up on everyone else, until they all learned how to be evil, and the Romans destroyed themselves by destroying their own social cohesiveness. You can't have a normal society and still have slavery, gladiators, etc. The result if children killing parents, incest, etc.
It does not work.
If you do not have a society based on empathy, you have nothing.

 

[Rigby5]

I was just addressing the belief that there can be no search without a warrant.

But you still need probable cause, and the Terri Stops are not legal.

 

[OKTexas]

Biden won because Trump totally screwed the country with his response to COVID. You don't see more Americans killed from a "Hoax", then from a world war, and people don't pay attention.

Damn, you just eat the hell out of that propaganda. A damn fool, is a perfect description for you.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Which out he might have a pocket sized construction in his pocket and can't resight the when document.

Did you bother to read that gibberish before you hit reply?

.

 

[MisterBeale]

In fact, they are infinite.

In the 1860's, the United States ceased, for all intents and purposes, operating as a constitutional republic, and began operating as a centralized deep state oligarchy.

Theoretically, you are correct, they should be infinite, if, we were still following the Constitution, but we aren't, it is just a pretext, a ruse, to mollify the masses.

That fact of the matter is, yes, the civil war WAS about slavery, but the Casus belli, was the federal government's violation of the state's sovereign rights. There is no prohibition in the Constitution against states succeeding from the Union, so?

According to the 9th amendment, as you say, the rights of the states, and of the people, should, hypothetically be "infinite." That is a right that the founders felt was reserved for the southern states if they could not resolve that issue peacefully. The northern industrialists were offended and put out, by the sheer economic scale, and the lack of economic development that did not take place because of slavery. . . the northern oligarchs didn't care anymore for the poor, drafted cannon fodder of the civil war, than they did about the black man.

Nor did the oligarchs back then, care about the damage they were doing to the constitution back then, anymore than our leaders do to ours, every day now. Back then. . . they destroyed the protections of the 9th.

Today? Our generation's leaders?

The leaders we have today, no matter the party, are busy destroying the protections of the First. During the pandemic, no gatherings, stopping some from protesting, no religious ceremony, and folks just accepted that. Now, there are some websites the government actually blocks you from visiting. . . I shit you not. . .

 

[frigidweirdo]

Totally wrong.
Murder and assault were uncommon until about 12,000 years ago.
As hunter/gatherers, the men were out hunting and the women ran the tribes.
The basis for human social instincts came from the fact that as arboreal primates, originally we relied on trees for defense.
For whatever reason we came down from the trees, without claws, fangs, speed, or armor, that only thing we have to rely on was group, social, coherence, like empathy.
Same are Meerkats.

After the last ice age melted, things changed that happened way too fast for evolution, and have to be from dysfunctional stress instead. Probably over population and desertification, especially in the Mideast.
That produced a constant war status, male domination instead of female, a fetish for weapons technology, etc.
That is easy to see, because there are literally hundreds of early Mideast societies, each temporarily winning, but destroying themselves through anti-social corruption, but training their successor.
Look at ancient Rome for example.
They would not have existed except that the Greeks beat up on them until the Etruscans learned to be as evil as the Greeks.
Then the Romans beat up on everyone else, until they all learned how to be evil, and the Romans destroyed themselves by destroying their own social cohesiveness. You can't have a normal society and still have slavery, gladiators, etc. The result if children killing parents, incest, etc.
It does not work.
If you do not have a society based on empathy, you have nothing.

When the basis for your society is survival through war, then you end up with a society that is too violent.

 

[MisterBeale]

Damn, you just eat the hell out of that propaganda. A damn fool, is a perfect description for you.

.

gene is pretty smart, and awfully crafty. . IMO? I believe he is a hired propagandist himself.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Privacy of medical decisions means that only the person and their physician have a say in those medical decisions. That the government can't interfere. That the government can't outlaw any medical procedure without a compelling government interest to do so.

True, a doctor-patient relationship should be a private affair, but that doesn't mean a doctor and patient can just agree to do any procedure. There are still laws in place to prevent certain things. Kevorkian comes to mind. Doctors still have to abide by laws and rules. There are procedures that are outlawed in the states.

If the procedure is deemed harmful, they get outlawed.

You're right, the federal government can't outlaw a procedure, its not their place, or is it their place to deem any procedure legal, and force every state to do it. It's the states decision if they want to allow it or not, and if they deem the procedure is not good, they can outlaw it.

If the residents of the state didn't want that law, and their representatives are going against their wishes, then they get voted out, and new representation, who will listen to their constituents, will be voted in.

 

[366h34d]

The Constitution does not explicitly call it a right to privacy but we do have the right to life, liberty & property. These are all individual rights that do not exist absent the right to privacy in the 14th Amendment.
The 1st Amendment says we have the right speak about our private thoughts & opinions, so those are protected.
The 2nd Amendment to private ownership of weapons, so those are as well.
The 9th Amendment says we have inviolate rights not enumerated specifically.
The 3rd protects the privacy of residences from housing soldiers.
The 4th involves the right to privacy in regards to search & seizure.
The Bill of Rights also guarantees our God given rights which would include privacy.
Do we have the right to privacy if we have a dozen dead bodies in the garage? No
Do we from unwarranted searches or monitoring, harassment, our beliefs, religion, weapons, medical info or speech? Absolutely

That is what the whole thing gets fxxk up. IF it was in the original constitution, what the fxxk we need the nth amendment for? SO, if the left wants abortion right, has the nth amendment, don't say the right was not in the original constitution but it should.

 

[OKTexas]

States have no authority over abortion at all either.
Where would they get it from?
States have no standing.
There is no one being harmed who is asking for the states to protect them.

The kid might have a differing opinion if they are allowed to exist long enough.

.

 

[OKTexas]

gene is pretty smart, and awfully crafty. . IMO? I believe he is a hired propagandist himself.

All that means is he's a good LIAR.

.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Which is totally illegal.
The feds have no right to prevent imports, from foods to prescription drugs.
There is no legal basis for the FDA, BATF, DEA, Homeland Security, etc.

You are of course completely out to lunch but of course, we've all figured that out already.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Which out he might have a pocket sized construction in his pocket and can't resight the when document.

Re what?

 

[HandleTheTruth]

Re what?

Damn computer.

 

[johngaltshrugged]

That is what the whole thing gets fxxk up. IF it was in the original constitution, what the fxxk we need the nth amendment for? SO, if the left wants abortion right, has the nth amendment, don't say the right was not in the original constitution but it should.

The left has no real argument here because none of us can exercise our rights if it causes bodily injury to another person without their consent.
From the moment of fertilization a separate living being is created with it's own unique human DNA code. This is not a clump of parasitic cells in a womb, it is a living human being developing at a rapid pace & has the same God given right to life as the rest of us