Snowdon is a dummy

Frank, Don't you understand simple English? I said the law of the land is the US Constitution. Imprint that in your brain - if that's at all possible.

For a guy who not long ago said "you only had guesses," it seems you have changed your own opinion about yourself. LOL

Constitutional rights
The right to privacy often means the right to personal autonomy, or the right to choose whether or not to engage in certain acts or have certain experiences. Several amendments to the U.S. Constitution have been used in varying degrees of success in determining a right to personal autonomy:

The First Amendment protects the privacy of beliefs
The Third Amendment protects the privacy of the home against the use of it for housing soldiers
The Fourth Amendment protects privacy against unreasonable searches
The Fifth Amendment protects against self-incrimination, which in turn protects the privacy of personal information
The Ninth Amendment says that the "enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people." This has been interpreted as justification for broadly reading the Bill of Rights to protect privacy in ways not specifically provided in the first eight amendments.

The right to privacy is most often cited in the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which states:

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

However, the protections have been narrowly defined and usually only pertain to family, marriage, motherhood, procreation and child rearing.

For example, the Supreme Court first recognized that the various Bill of Rights guarantees creates a "zone of privacy" in Griswold v. Connecticut, a 1965 ruling that upheld marital privacy and struck down bans on contraception.

The court ruled in 1969 that the right to privacy protected a person's right to possess and view pornography in his own home. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote in Stanley v. Georgia that, " If the First Amendment means anything, it means that a State has no business telling a man, sitting alone in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch."

The controversial case Roe v. Wade in 1972 firmly established the right to privacy as fundamental, and required that any governmental infringement of that right to be justified by a compelling state interest. In Roe, the court ruled that the state's compelling interest in preventing abortion and protecting the life of the mother outweighs a mother's personal autonomy only after viability. Before viability, the mother's right to privacy limits state interference due to the lack of a compelling state interest.

In 2003, the court, in Lawrence v. Texas, overturned an earlier ruling and found that Texas had violated the rights of two gay men when it enforced a law prohibiting sodomy. [Countdown: 10 Milestones in Gay Rights History]

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, "The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives. The State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime. Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government."

Quote:

Constitutional rights
The right to privacy often means the right to personal autonomy, or the right to choose whether or not to engage in certain acts or have certain experiences. Several amendments to the U.S. Constitution have been used in varying degrees of success in determining a right to personal autonomy:

The First Amendment protects the privacy of beliefs
The Third Amendment protects the privacy of the home against the use of it for housing soldiers
The Fourth Amendment protects privacy against unreasonable searches
The Fifth Amendment protects against self-incrimination, which in turn protects the privacy of personal information
The Ninth Amendment says that the "enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people." This has been interpreted as justification for broadly reading the Bill of Rights to protect privacy in ways not specifically provided in the first eight amendments.

The right to privacy is most often cited in the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which states:

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

However, the protections have been narrowly defined and usually only pertain to family, marriage, motherhood, procreation and child rearing.

For example, the Supreme Court first recognized that the various Bill of Rights guarantees creates a "zone of privacy" in Griswold v. Connecticut, a 1965 ruling that upheld marital privacy and struck down bans on contraception.

The court ruled in 1969 that the right to privacy protected a person's right to possess and view pornography in his own home. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote in Stanley v. Georgia that, " If the First Amendment means anything, it means that a State has no business telling a man, sitting alone in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch."

The controversial case Roe v. Wade in 1972 firmly established the right to privacy as fundamental, and required that any governmental infringement of that right to be justified by a compelling state interest. In Roe, the court ruled that the state's compelling interest in preventing abortion and protecting the life of the mother outweighs a mother's personal autonomy only after viability. Before viability, the mother's right to privacy limits state interference due to the lack of a compelling state interest.

In 2003, the court, in Lawrence v. Texas, overturned an earlier ruling and found that Texas had violated the rights of two gay men when it enforced a law prohibiting sodomy. [Countdown: 10 Milestones in Gay Rights History]

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, "The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives. The State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime. Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government."

What's relevant is their breaking the laws established by our Constitution.

I said the law of the land is the US Constitution.

What does this mean to you, Frank? I posted this three pages ago.

Quote:

What's relevant is their breaking the laws established by our Constitution.

How does this differ from,

Quote:

I said the law of the land is the US Constitution.

I said the law of the land is the US Constitution.

Actually, you didn't say that at all.

I figured you wouldn't understand what that article says. "Ignorance" fits.

13JAN2012: I would NEVER ask for "proof" that gods exist or that gods do not exist. I am convinced such proof does not exist and such a request would be unfair and fruitless. I would assume the "assertion" was actually a "guess"...and only ask for the evidence upon which the guess that “gods exist” or “gods do not exist” is based…and then comment on that evidence.

13JAN2012:What evidence do you see that gods exist?
What evidence do you see that gods do not exist? 

I see you have difficulty with the English language too! Other than the wording, what's the difference in meaning?

No, again, Frank. It doesn't matter whether SCOTUS determines what is lawful and not lawful; it's determined by the Constitution of the US.

That you can't "see" their own contradictions concerning the issue of "privacy" is a problem you have; not me!

I have always understood the fact that our government doesn't always meet my ideals - whether it's the administration, congress, or SCOTUS, and that I must live with it. That doesn't mean I can't challenge what they do in an open forum like a2k.

I try to determine my opinions from what I deem as necessary for our country to remain healthy both politically and economically. I don't make any of those decisions for the American people, and I personally do not have any influence on our government. I learned that from writing to my congressional reps and to presidents in the past. I can only control what I do.

Here's a direct contradiction y0u made on 13 January of 2012!

Your posts

Quote:

13JAN2012: I would NEVER ask for "proof" that gods exist or that gods do not exist. I am convinced such proof does not exist and such a request would be unfair and fruitless. I would assume the "assertion" was actually a "guess"...and only ask for the evidence upon which the guess that “gods exist” or “gods do not exist” is based…and then comment on that evidence.

13JAN2012:What evidence do you see that gods exist?
What evidence do you see that gods do not exist? 

BTW, I'm still searching for your "it's only a guess" posts. I'll be relieved of this task of others will support my contention.

Here's a direct contradiction y0u made on 13 January of 2012!

Your posts

Quote:

13JAN2012: I would NEVER ask for "proof" that gods exist or that gods do not exist. I am convinced such proof does not exist and such a request would be unfair and fruitless. I would assume the "assertion" was actually a "guess"...and only ask for the evidence upon which the guess that “gods exist” or “gods do not exist” is based…and then comment on that evidence.

13JAN2012:What evidence do you see that gods exist?
What evidence do you see that gods do not exist? 

Frank, You're a big disappointment; you don't even understand the definition of common words like "proof" and "evidence." They are interchangeable words; one means the other by definition.

They are not interchangeable.

They are not interchangeable.

proof
pro͞of/Submit
noun
1.
evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement.
"you will be asked to give proof of your identity"
synonyms: evidence, verification, corroboration, authentication, confirmation, certification, documentation, validation, attestation, substantiation More

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
"the study finds little evidence of overt discrimination"
synonyms: proof, confirmation, verification, substantiation, corroboration, affirmation, attestation More