The right of privacy is on the ballot this November

[DaveSZ]

Everyone should know about the right of privacy (autonomy from the state on such personal matters such as procreation), and how important and fundamental this right is in a free country.


Based on recent rulings under this current Supreme Court such as Lawrence v. Texas, we can safely deduce that this right is only being upheld by a 6-3 vote at this time.

A second Bush term and several more Fundie and/or Opus Dei fascist justices nominated and confirmed to the high court could conceivably result in the loss of these important legal protections.

These protections are unfortunately not explicitly spelled out in the Bill of Rights or subsequent amendments to the constitution - yet the freedoms they protect are at the very core of liberty itself.


If any of you or your loved ones have ever used birth control, ever needed an abortion, have ever gone to a strip club, ever viewed pornography, or have ever engaged in anal or oral sex, you were protected from fundamentalists and other authoritarians who would otherwise seek to control, through criminal penalty, your fundamental right to the most personal of human acts and liberties.

[DaveSZ]

1. Educate yourself (it's not too long):

http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/personal_autonomy.html

right of privacy: personal autonomy

The right of privacy has evolved to protect the freedom of individuals to choose whether or not to perform certain acts or subject themselves to certain experiences. This personal autonomy has grown into a 'liberty' protected by the due process clause of the 14th amendment. However, this liberty is narrowly defined, and generally only protects privacy of family, marriage, motherhood, procreation, and child rearing. Further extensions of this right of privacy have been attempted under the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, however a general right to personal autonomy has yet to take hold beyond limited circumstances.

-more

[DaveSZ]

2. I should say

I don't like Kerry that much (and now that he's using Al Gore's playbook of running to the right of Bush, it turns me off more), but I damn well hope he wins simply because a Bush Supreme Court would roll back the right of privacy and many other important civil liberties.

[TaleWgnDg]

3. uuummmmmm . . . many of these "privacy" cases . . .

are on a thin thread, a narrow margin of a 5-4 split on the U.S. Supreme Court bench. And its more than privacy cases that hang by a thread (as if that is not enough, alone)!!

Further, its projected that more than one U.S. Supreme Court justice will retire during the next presidential term . . . William H. Rehnquist may retire. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg may retire as well because she is still recovering from cancer surgery. Then there's Justice John Paul Stevens who is in -- at least -- his mid-to-late 80s!

One appointment, only ONE APPOINTMENT may tip the scales back to more than 1/2 century ago . . . all kidding aside. THIS IS DAMN SERIOUS STUFF.

And then of course there's Dumbya who has told the world that he will nominate "another Antonin Scalia" to the U.S. Supreme Court bench. Unbelievable. Or worse (can it get worse? yes, it can), he may nominate persons who are similar to his "recess appointments" of late who cannot separate church and state issues, thump the bible, and spit on Roe v. Wade and other individual/civil rights case law.

VOTE FOR JOHN KERRY!!! Do not let our nation's highest court (U.S. Supreme Court) turn back the clock to the early 1900s or before in law!
. . . .

[DaveSZ]

4. Yep

Did you hear he nominated the guy who wrote one of his torture memos to the 9th circuit?

He was confirmed before the memo leaked and now has a lifetime appointment.

That's the kind of fascists Bush thinks will uphold the rights of Americans.

[TaleWgnDg]

5. yes, nothing is beyond Dumbya and his tactics . . .

Early in the summer of 2003, I wrote a long, protracted email about federal judicial nominees . . . the email message ended up on this url
www.newsgarden.org/columns/TaleWgnDgcolumns.shtml

This is the very same subject matter. Bush is trying to PACK THE FEDERAL COURTS in order to toss out 1/2 century to a century of U.S. Supreme Court cases. Seriously. This is Bush's agenda. And he will do it too.

That is, unless Bush loses to John Kerry. Not too many folks fully understand that when you vote for president, you are, indirectly, voting for who sits on the U.S. Supreme Court and what is the law across America for more than 40, 50 or more years.

edited to add this url http://www.independentjudiciary.com/