"Conservative" columnist Ann Coulter disdains "...the (nonexistent) 'right to privacy.'
"I know as much about the 'right to privacy' as I know about any other made-up, nonexistent right," she snickers to her readers.
Yes, Ann, free people do indeed have a right to privacy. The lie you and other neocons perpetuate--that it is not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights so therefore doesn't exist--is an intentional bit of disinformation. In a real sense, this propaganda abets the state in its control over people's lives and freeedom.
You know damn well the Constitution is not intended to enumerate all rights of free Americans, but to define the limits under which the national government can legitimately exercise power. You know damn well this was one of the concerns against adding a "Bill of Rights" to the Constitution--that people like you would construe it to mean only the rights mentioned must be recognized. And you know damn well that what you espouse would have been alien to the Framers, who wisely (in addition to Amendment IV) added:
If the federal government has no authority "to deny or disparage" other rights, Ann, what makes you think you do?
The argument that privacy is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution is hollow. The rebuttal ought to be "Exactly. So it follows the government has no authority to give itself privacy-invading powers that haven't been specifically delegated to it."
"I know as much about the 'right to privacy' as I know about any other made-up, nonexistent right," she snickers to her readers.
Yes, Ann, free people do indeed have a right to privacy. The lie you and other neocons perpetuate--that it is not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights so therefore doesn't exist--is an intentional bit of disinformation. In a real sense, this propaganda abets the state in its control over people's lives and freeedom.
You know damn well the Constitution is not intended to enumerate all rights of free Americans, but to define the limits under which the national government can legitimately exercise power. You know damn well this was one of the concerns against adding a "Bill of Rights" to the Constitution--that people like you would construe it to mean only the rights mentioned must be recognized. And you know damn well that what you espouse would have been alien to the Framers, who wisely (in addition to Amendment IV) added:
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
If the federal government has no authority "to deny or disparage" other rights, Ann, what makes you think you do?
The argument that privacy is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution is hollow. The rebuttal ought to be "Exactly. So it follows the government has no authority to give itself privacy-invading powers that haven't been specifically delegated to it."