Skip to main content

View Diary: Justice Thomas Gets One Right (130 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Right to privacy to what end? (none)
    Does the right to privacy allow me to grow weed in my bathroom and get high in the kitchen?

    Does it allow me to starve my dog to death in my basement?

    Plot terrorost attacks?

    Collect kiddie porn?

    How does one know what i covered by this blanket and what is left exposed? I think that's part of the appeal of this 'right'. It has no text so everyone can imagine it to read just how they would write it.

    If written, what would the text of a privacy right say?

    •  essentially (none)
      that everyone has the right to do what they please so long as they don't interfere with anyone else's right to the same. Meaning that one's right to privacy ends only at the point of causing harm to others (or arguably, in some exceptional cases, oneself). That if you're not harming others, e.g. terrorism or kiddie porn, the government has no business messing with your life. In my experience, this is a principle that most people understand and support across a pretty broad range of subcultures and education levels and even ideological persuasions.  

      remember your humanity, and forget the rest

      by human on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 01:54:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  In other words (none)
        Your right to keep and bear arms extends up to the point where you choose to stick a gun in my face.

        I think that's pretty simple...

        So from the grandparent poster.  I don't care if you grow weed in your basement and use it yourself.

        I do care if you starve your dog, collect kiddie porn, or plot a terrorist attack, because those actions effect others.

        •  well (none)
          I do care if you starve your dog
          NOt another person, though.

          collect kiddie porn
          Well let's think about that one, as well.  What if you are the type of perv who goes to public pools and takes photos of little kids naked and/or barely clothed playing in the water?  What about computer generated kiddie porn - no real children abused.  What about all the tiny minute exceptions they try to come up with.  Privacy and all.

          Privacy is not necessarily a winner, politically.  

          •  Well... (none)
            Dogs are another living being, and it's generally accepted that you don't starve dogs or horses or livestock if you can help it.

            Well let's think about that one, as well.  What if you are the type of perv who goes to public pools and takes photos of little kids naked and/or barely clothed playing in the water?  What about computer generated kiddie porn - no real children abused.  What about all the tiny minute exceptions they try to come up with.  Privacy and all.

            Not much you can do about someone taking public pictures.  Now if they were peaking in people's windows, that's different.

            As for computer generated... The SCOTUS ruled that since there were no real person, involved there was no real harm.  It's sick and disgusting, but not illegal.

            Privacy is not necessarily a winner, politically.

            Maybe.  But then either is telling other people how they should run their lives.

            •  answer (none)
              Not much you can do about someone taking public pictures.  Now if they were peaking in people's windows, that's different.
              No, actually in most states it is illegal to take "public" photos of people and especially kids that are considered to be lacivious.

              I agree with you about telling people how to run their lives.

              But politically, "privacy" is not a sure fire winner if the GOP can convince people to get past "do you like privacy, yes or no?"

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site