Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#30
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dave" wrote
So, Vito, perhaps you could point out to me where in the Constitution I find the words "privacy" and "abortion." First, please understand that the Constitution does NOT give us "rights", it describes the construct of the government and assigns powers to it. It also forbids the government any power not so delegated. Thus the absence of "privacy" and "abortion" mean that the government has no authority to regulate them. Ever heard of the 9th amendment? It addressed that very issue by stating that "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." So the absence of these words clearly does NOT mean rights do not exist, as the lunatic fringe of some churches assert. Just the opposite! See http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/c...n/amendment09/ "Aside from contending that a bill of rights was unnecessary, the Federalists responded to those opposing ratification of the Constitution because of the lack of a declaration of fundamental rights by arguing that inasmuch as it would be impossible to list all rights it would be dangerous to list some because there would be those who would seize on the absence of the omitted rights to assert that government was unrestrained as to those. Madison adverted to this argument in presenting his proposed amendments to the House of Representatives. ''It has been objected also against a bill of rights, that, by enumerating particular exceptions to the grant of power, it would disparage those rights which were not placed in that enumeration; and it might follow by implication, that those rights which were not singled out, were intended to be assigned into the hands of the General Government, and were consequently insecure. This is one of the most plausible arguments I have ever heard against the admission of a bill of rights into this system; but, I conceive, that it may be guarded against. I have attempted it, as gentlemen may see by turning to the last clause of the fourth resolution.'' It is clear from its text and from Madison's statement that the Amendment states a rule of construction, making clear that a Bill of Rights might not by implication be taken to increase the powers of the national government in areas not enumerated. ..... "The Ninth Amendment had been mentioned infrequently in decisions of the Supreme Court until it became the subject of some exegesis by several of the Justices in Griswold v. Connecticut. There a statute prohibiting use of contraceptives was voided as an infringement of the right of marital privacy. Justice Douglas, writing the opinion of the Court, asserted that the ''specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance. Thus, while privacy is nowhere mentioned, it is one of the values served and protected by the First Amendment, through its protection of associational rights, and by the Third, the Fourth, and the Fifth Amendments as well. The Justice recurred to the text of the Ninth Amendment to support the thought that these penumbral rights are protected by one Amendment or a complex of Amendments despite the absence of a specific reference. Justice Goldberg, concurring, devoted several pages to the Amendment. ''The language and history of the Ninth Amendment reveal that the Framers of the Constitution believed that there are additional fundamental rights, protected from governmental infringement, which exist alongside those fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight constitutional amendments. . . . To hold that a right so basic and fundamental and so deep-rooted in our society as the right of privacy in marriage may be infringed because that right is not guaranteed in so many words by the first eight amendments to the Constitution is to ignore the Ninth Amendment and to give it no effect whatsoever. Moreover, a judicial construction that this fundamental right is not protected by the Constitution because it is not mentioned in explicit terms by one of the first eight amendments or elsewhere in the Constitution would violate the Ninth Amendment." Please note that birth control, not abortion, was illegal in most states until 1965, enforcing the religious idiocy that one should avoid sex except to produce a baby. That's what the Jerry Falwell camp calls "the good old days". People reaching puberty after 1965 cannot imagine what it was like when even in "liberal" California a full 2/3 of brides came pregnant to the alter and most families had unwanted children. Many refuse to believe America was ever so stupid. |