Comments on: The Right To Privacy http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/08/31/the-right-to-privacy/ Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time. Mon, 17 Jun 2013 22:29:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Silent Lucidity » links for 2006-09-05 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/08/31/the-right-to-privacy/#comment-2340 Silent Lucidity » links for 2006-09-05 Thu, 07 Sep 2006 10:48:22 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/08/31/the-right-to-privacy/#comment-2340 [...] The Right To Privacy In our current Constitutional jurisprudence, the Right to Privacy is an exception to unlimited government power. If we returned to a Presumption of Liberty, the Right to Privacy, along with a host of other rights and liberties, wouldn’t be an exception (tags: constitution liberties rights privacy-anonymity law) [...]

]]> By: Quotulatiousness http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/08/31/the-right-to-privacy/#comment-2339 Quotulatiousness Tue, 05 Sep 2006 13:01:27 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/08/31/the-right-to-privacy/#comment-2339 Carnival of Liberty no. 61

Welcome to the sixty-first edition of the Carnival of Liberty. This is a round-up of blog postings on topics of interest to the Life, Liberty, Property (LLP) group. To skip to a particular set of posts, you can use this…

]]> By: PLF on Eminent Domain http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/08/31/the-right-to-privacy/#comment-2329 PLF on Eminent Domain Fri, 01 Sep 2006 13:46:04 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/08/31/the-right-to-privacy/#comment-2329 The Presumption of Liberty And Kelo

Brad Warbiany at The Liberty Papers explains how the Kelo decision resulted from the abandonment of the presumption of liberty.

]]> By: Pro-Polygamy http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/08/31/the-right-to-privacy/#comment-2327 Pro-Polygamy Thu, 31 Aug 2006 23:42:23 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/08/31/the-right-to-privacy/#comment-2327 I searched google for pages with “Ninth Amendment” at pro-polygamy media site,
http://www.Pro-Polygamy.com

There are four articles.

1.

Some Conservatives Making Mistake on Marriage
Date: Jul 30, 2003
http://www.pro-polygamy.com/articles.php?news=0005
Quote:
Opposite the Tenth Amendment’s constraining government to only explicitly enumerated authority, the Ninth Amendment conversely declares that rights of individuals do not have to be explicitly enumerated. That is how a “right to privacy” for individuals may be constitutional.

Ironically, in the same way that the “right to privacy” phrase is truly not enumerated in the Constitution, neither is the word, “marriage.”

The same Tenth Amendment, which some mis-perceived as applicable against the “right to privacy” for individuals, specifically does indeed apply to “marriage” involvement by the government.

The Ninth Amendment can allow the “right to privacy” of individuals without it having to be constitutionally enumerated. At the same time, because federal government “marriage” authority is not enumerated anywhere in the Constitution, the Tenth Amendment prohibits it from being involved in “marriage” whatsoever.

2.

These Conservatives Oppose Unbiblical Marriage Amendment
Date: Aug 14, 2003
http://www.pro-polygamy.com/articles.php?news=0006
Quote:
The paradigm of modern conservatism is based upon unchanged, strictly limited government and unenumerated individual freedom. The Tenth Amendment’s principle limits federal government authority to explicitly enumerated items in the Constitution. The Ninth Amendment codifies the converse principle that individuals’ rights do not have to be enumerated. Those two principles are what define true conservatism.

3.

‘New Liberal’ Hypocrisies on Government Marriage
Date: May 15, 2004
http://www.pro-polygamy.com/articles.php?news=0017
Quote:
Immediately after Lawrence v. Texas, “New Liberals” cried out that the “right to privacy” is not explicitly written in the Constitution. Again, they misapplied the Tenth Amendment, trying to suggest that the Court has no authority to rule on that matter.

The Ninth Amendment answers that absurd argument. Specifically, individuals’ rights do not have to be so constitutionally codified. Besides, the last clause of the Tenth Amendment clearly says, “or to the people,” meaning the rights of the individuals.

4.

Failed Marriage Amendment Sabotaged the Churches
Date: Oct 07, 2004
http://www.pro-polygamy.com/articles.php?news=0024
Quote:
The true conservative position is that of strictly limited government. Constitutionally, government’s only legitimate role is to protect each individual’s rights from being infringed by anyone else — including government. Government’s purpose is not for social engineering.

The Tenth Amendment constrains federal government power to only specifically enumerated authority. The Ninth Amendment codifies that the rights of individuals do not have to be enumerated whatsoever.

Without such constraint upon government power and such protections of un-enumerated individuals’ rights, any minority is vulnerable to the tyranny of any then-current majority.

What this shows is that polygamists have been making this same argument. It’s not a penumbra to create “polygamy rights.” Instead it is that government has no constitutional authority to prevent polygamy for consenting-adults. Government is not for social engineering, but is only for protecting natural rights from being infringed.

]]>