|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:21 AM Original message |
Is there really such a thing as a 'right to privacy?' |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wuushew (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:22 AM Response to Original message |
1. Yes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:23 AM Response to Reply #1 |
4. Say more. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wuushew (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:29 AM Response to Reply #4 |
9. Isn't the 4th amendment an indirect definition of privacy? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:33 AM Response to Reply #9 |
12. But this is specifically a protection against the government's power to charge one as a criminal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
COLGATE4 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:38 AM Response to Reply #12 |
16. It's not directly about the government's ability to charge a person |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:44 AM Response to Reply #16 |
21. But that's implied, some scholars say, in the Ninth Amendment, not the fourth. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MH1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:40 AM Response to Reply #12 |
18. That's not what it says. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:50 AM Response to Reply #18 |
25. That is a reasonable way to read that. Thank you! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:23 AM Response to Original message |
2. Currently. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SheilaT (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:23 AM Response to Original message |
3. Not specifically in the Constitution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:25 AM Response to Reply #3 |
7. Does the Fourth Amendment imply it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:35 AM Response to Reply #7 |
14. The Ninth Amendment covers it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SheilaT (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 01:59 PM Response to Reply #7 |
32. I can't remember which part |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BillStein (403 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 02:01 PM Response to Reply #3 |
33. that's the key |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
uncommon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:24 AM Response to Original message |
5. Of course not dummy. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HereSince1628 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:25 AM Response to Original message |
6. THe founders tried to get personal privacy of your person |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:28 AM Response to Reply #6 |
8. That is what the Fourth Amendment is about, right? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hangingon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:31 AM Response to Reply #8 |
10. I will agree with you BertWorm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HereSince1628 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:33 AM Response to Reply #8 |
11. Unfortunately, for pie-holes who want to argue, it didn't use the word privacy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bluenorthwest (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 02:05 PM Response to Reply #11 |
34. The word 'privacy' at that time tended to denote the 'privy' |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HereSince1628 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 02:14 PM Response to Reply #34 |
36. I am sure that is considered by Justices Roberts, and Scalia |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:34 AM Response to Original message |
13. Yes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The Velveteen Ocelot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:35 AM Response to Original message |
15. The Supreme Court has held that the right to privacy is implied. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
COLGATE4 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:40 AM Response to Reply #15 |
17. Exacrly. That's why all these mouthbreathers who disagree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
COLGATE4 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:40 AM Response to Reply #15 |
19. Exacrly. That's why all these mouthbreathers who disagree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
COLGATE4 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:41 AM Response to Reply #15 |
20. Exactly. That's why all these mouthbreathers who disagree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WolverineDG (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:47 AM Response to Reply #15 |
23. In the "penumbra" of the First Amendment nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ljm2002 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:44 AM Response to Original message |
22. I hope so... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Uncle Joe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:47 AM Response to Original message |
24. The Fourth and Ninth Amendments imply it but just from a logical standpoint if there were no |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 11:53 AM Response to Reply #24 |
26. But CBS wasn't fined for violating Janet Jackson's rights. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Uncle Joe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 01:17 PM Response to Reply #26 |
27. That's correct but if there was no presumption of privacy and everything was open to the public |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 01:25 PM Response to Reply #27 |
28. Please! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Uncle Joe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 01:35 PM Response to Reply #28 |
29. I apologize, that was harsh, but I figured that if |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 01:38 PM Response to Reply #29 |
30. Touche! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BillStein (403 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 02:07 PM Response to Reply #27 |
35. that's backwards |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Uncle Joe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 02:14 PM Response to Reply #35 |
37. It's also for the onlookers. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Sep-30-10 01:54 PM Response to Original message |
31. According to the Supreme Court, and who am I to argue: yes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Mon May 13th 2024, 03:36 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC