Need help: "Abortion" may not specifically be mentioned in the Constitution but neither is PRIVACY.

[calimary]

What else is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution that we in this NON-18th-Century reality take for granted as rights?

I can think of a few:
The rights of blacks to be acknowledged a WHOLE person and not 3/5 of one.
The right to drive a motor vehicle and all the legal rules and applications thereof.
The right to die (refusing treatment).

I’m in the midst of an argument I want to defend effectively. I’d appreciate some additional facts and points if possible, please!

And thank you in advance.

[BlueJac]

1. Neither is anti abortion mentioned.

[herding cats]

2. My error

My apologies!

[Ocelot II]

6. Uh, no. Remember the First Amendment?

Due process? All specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

[herding cats]

7. Oh, I thought they meant the original constitution.

My apologies!

[Poiuyt]

3. Neither is the number 9.

[cbabe]

4. Votes for women.

[TreasonousBastard]

8. The Constitution discusses the organization of government...

not the organization of society. The Bill of Rights exists because they realized that didn't always work so well.

How many Cabinet positions are mentioned in it? Where is the FAA?

[LeftInTX]

11. LOL..FAA!!

[Ocelot II]

33. It was formed to regulate the airports that were built during the Revolutionary War

and that our troops seized from the British. https://time.com/5620936/donald-trump-revolutionary-war-airports/

[rgbecker]

9. Right to procreate and have babies!

The GOP, led by Tucker Carlson, will be surely looking into terminating (and sterilizing) the surge of the black and brown people who, they say, are being nurtured by the "Ruling Elites" to keep them in power and oppress the whites....or something like that!

[unblock]

10. side note, but regarding the 3/5th clause:

this is widely misunderstood. the insult was that slavery was recognized in the constitution, and slaves were denied many rights.

the 3/5ths clause allowed the *states* that had legalized slavery to include 3/5th of slaves in their population count for the purpose of allocating congressional seats (and therefore electoral votes as well).

given that slaves couldn't vote at all, this did nothing for slaves. in fact, it did the reverse -- it boosted the power of the slave states, giving them more representation in congress and more of a voice in choosing a president. it basically enabled the non-slave portion of the state to cast additional votes "on behalf of" slaves, though obviously those votes were not cast in the interest of slaves.

had the constitution recognized slaves as whole persons for this purpose, this would have upset the delicate balance the framers sought, and the slave states would have taken full control of the federal government and no doubt would have made slavery legal across the entire country -- at a time when the north was not yet willing to have a civil war to object.


the slave states were the ones who wanted slaves to be counted in full; the free states were the ones who wanted slaves to be not counted at all.

[LeftInTX]

13. Yes

[calimary]

26. Oh MAN! Your first paragraph!

Last edited Fri May 6, 2022, 01:18 AM - Edit history (1)

“…slavery was recognized in the Constitution…”

For all those who claim the Constitution is SO sacred on its face, AND to be taken AS IS!

Then how come we’ve got all these amendments? Do they not count? Do they not count when they’re deemed inconvenient? Does that mean the Constitution still allows me to own people?

[unblock]

29. Oh they love the amendments when it suits them

Especially the second amendment.

As many of them do with the Bible, they pick and choose the parts they like, or at least that can be twisted into something they like, and ignore the rest.

[Thunderbeast]

12. The best explanation of the derived "Right to Privacy"

Last edited Wed May 4, 2022, 05:56 PM - Edit history (1)

Is in the very entertaining play "What the Constitution Means to Me".

Find the video of the play, or read the book.

Available with Amazon Prime subscription.

[cilla4progress]

17. Excellent rejoinder!

1. Right to privacy is inferred - derived, as you say, from - 14th amendment? Don't recall specifically. Did a project paper on Roe, but, many years back! Essentially, people should be left alone except to the extent the common good is implicated.

2. What the Constitution Means to Me - Heidi must be in a fit! She grew up here, is a product of this town, and I saw and loved her award-winning Broadway production (streamed, not live)! Thanks for the reminder!

[Thunderbeast]

34. Available on Amazon Prime.

[cilla4progress]

35. That's

where I saw it.

Thanks!

[hlthe2b]

14. Neither are women mentioned as having rights or even being human

Given the word "woman" is not mentioned in the original constitution, then this whole argument is moot. (nor is race, btw)

[calimary]

28. OMG! EXCELLENT!!!!!

“Woman” is not even mentioned in the Constitution!

I can tell my friend that her reading of the Constitution means neither one of us NOR our daughters have any rights or reason even to be here, I guess.

[steelyboo]

15. here is a link to the original Law Review Article

Where Justice Brandeis lays out the "right to privacy"

https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/privacy/Privacy_brand_warr2.html

[cilla4progress]

19. Thanks -

Will download and read!

[MissMillie]

16. There is no right to drive a motor vehicle on public roads

it's a privilege.

At least that's the way I learned it.

[MineralMan]

18. I've always seen it as being derived from the right of "people to be secure in their persons."

It's about being protected against "unreasonable searches and seizures." Your thoughts and actions that only have to do with yourself should be protected against interference by the government. That's how I've always interpreted it. Privacy has to do with your person, including your brain and bodily processes.

Since being pregnant is not something that is openly visible to others for some months, for the government to pry into a woman's status in that regard is "unreasonable." There is no reason for any authorities to inquire into whether a woman is or is not pregnant.

That's how I see it, anyhow. Fourth Amendment rights.

[Wounded Bear]

20. Yep, 4th Amendment covers it...nt

[uponit7771]

31. +1, Alito admits in the 73 RvW decision the majority says there are too many status that point to

... the right to privacy and its assumed to some degree then used them *NOT* pointing out one status as a reason to justify his egregious ruling claim.

Someone needs to point out the status to Alito that humans shouldn't eat people who they have just meet too.

[LeftInTX]

32. The 4th amendment prevents the federal govt, the 14th prevents state govt

At least that's what I figured out this week!
The 14th provides full citizenship to those in states where state law prohibited citizenship of non-white people. (Former confederacy)

[HeartachesNhangovers]

21. There's also no federal right to die. The USSC has consistently ruled against that.

See Washington v. Glucksberg.

[hamsterjill]

22. The preamble

“Secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves…”

That does it for me.

Definition of liberty:

the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.

[world wide wally]

23. There is no right ecplicitly given to work where you want to work.

[RobinA]

24. I Believe

that the lack of "privacy" in the Constitution is why the whole hated "penumbra" argument in Roe came about.

[H2O Man]

25. Recommended.

My friend Oren Lyons pointed out to me, years ago, that there is mention of Indians in the Constitution, although the government has yet to recognize and respect that. He said that non-Indians should study this carefully, as it is distinct from the Bill of Rights' focus on individual rights, and instead deals with group rights. He recommends that people use the Constitution to protect group rights, say, for example, those of women.

[roamer65]

27. 10th amendment.

The powers not specifically granted to the federal government and that are not prohibited to the States, are reserved for the States and the people.

That means states can declare and enforce a right to privacy.

[calimary]

30. Hey guys, MANY thanks for all this input!

Cuz I know for rock-solid sure that I’m nowhere near any kind of Constitutional expert, but I do know others here are.