Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 74
Thanks Tree22Thanks

Thread: Ninth Circuit decision could lead to SCOTUS showdown over your right to a private sex

  1. #1
    THE PUNDIT DemoWhip's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    4431

    From
    In Your Heart!

    Exclamation Ninth Circuit decision could lead to SCOTUS showdown over your right to a private sex

    Ninth Circuit decision could lead to SCOTUS showdown over your right to a private sex life
    By Rebecca Pilar Buckwalter Poza

    "On Friday, the Ninth Circuit—the federal appeals court for Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington—decided that, contrary to what two other circuit courts have said, sex is a constitutional right such that the state cannot fire an employee for private sexual conduct."
    "[T]he panel held that the constitutional guarantees of privacy and free association prohibit the State from taking adverse employment action on the basis of private sexual conduct unless it demonstrates that such conduct negatively affects on-the-job performance or violates a constitutionally permissible, narrowly tailored regulation."
    "That the courts are fighting over Lawrence points to the second reason the Supreme Court may take the case: The concept that’s been litigated as applied to heterosexual police officers is one that has tremendous implications for gay rights, especially as gay rights decisions have thus far been based on a right to liberty. (Of course, the third-rail nature of this case is also a reason for the court to avoid it.)"





    ================================================== ==

    This case promises to be an interesting one to say the least. The Ninth Court of Appeals ruling sets a good precedent for sexual conduct in private. That is a good ruling and one that the SCOTUS should uphold if it gets to them. Other than that, you would not be entitled to have a private sex life and Big Brother could be watching you from now on and coming down hard on you for doing things it did not agree should be done.
    Thanks from Friday13

  2. #2
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24,330
    Thanks
    4064

    From
    North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by DemoWhip View Post
    Ninth Circuit decision could lead to SCOTUS showdown over your right to a private sex life
    By Rebecca Pilar Buckwalter Poza










    ================================================== ==

    This case promises to be an interesting one to say the least. The Ninth Court of Appeals ruling sets a good precedent for sexual conduct in private. That is a good ruling and one that the SCOTUS should uphold if it gets to them. Other than that, you would not be entitled to have a private sex life and Big Brother could be watching you from now on and coming down hard on you for doing things it did not agree should be done.
    The right to privacy is an invention of the courts and no where in the constitution does it actually exist. This is also why it's application is entirely subjective and has more contradictions than one can count.

    That being said - I support this effort to limit government (and I would add corporate/business to the list) intrusion into the private lives of their employees. I just differ that this is the correct way to go about addressing this issue.

    I would prefer we demand those morons in Washington to make themselves useful and write new law that protects our privacy in regards to our personal relationships - which is really none of our employers's business. I would also support adding any speech we make on our personal time to such law as well.

    So I agree that our privacy rights need to protected. But let's actually put such rights into law instead of relying on some idiot in a black robe to decide when we have them and when we don't.
    Last edited by Jeremy; 12th February 2018 at 05:47 PM.
    Thanks from One

  3. #3
    THE PUNDIT DemoWhip's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    4431

    From
    In Your Heart!
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy View Post
    The right to privacy is an invention of the courts and no where in the constitution does it actually exist. This is also why it's application is entirely subjective and has more contradictions than one can count.

    That being said - I support this effort to limit government (and I would add corporate/business to the list) intrusion into the private lives of their employees. I just differ that this is the correct way to go about addressing this issue.

    I would prefer we demand those morons in Washington to make themselves useful and write new law that protects our privacy in regards to our personal relationships - which is really none of our employers's business. I would also support adding any speech we make on our personal time to such law as well.

    So I agree that our privacy rights need to protected. But let's actually put such rights into law instead of relying on some idiot in a black robe to decide when we have them and when we don't.
    Do you think it realistic that a Republican House and Senate would champion such a law for the citizens as it should or would it take a Democratic Congress and President to be able to get it signed into law?
    Thanks from Friday13

  4. #4
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24,330
    Thanks
    4064

    From
    North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by DemoWhip View Post
    Do you think it realistic that a Republican House and Senate would champion such a law for the citizens as it should or would it take a Democratic Congress and President to be able to get it signed into law?
    Frankly I doubt either party will volunteer to write such laws. That's why I said there needs to be a public outcry for them because that's the only way it's going to happen. Politicians on both sides of the aisle love to concentrate on the personal lives of their opponents as a way to avoid the issues and assassinate their characters.

    We need actual laws protecting our privacy in this country. The selective use of some Judge's reasoning as it relates to some vague undefined right to privacy doesn't cut it.
    Last edited by Jeremy; 12th February 2018 at 06:39 PM.
    Thanks from GoaTlOver and MaryAnne

  5. #5
    THE PUNDIT DemoWhip's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    4431

    From
    In Your Heart!
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy View Post
    Frankly I doubt either party will volunteer to write such laws. That's why I said there needs to be a public outcry for them because that's the only way it's going to happen. Politicians on both sides of the aisle love to concentrate on the personal lives of their opponents as a way to avoid the issues and assassinate their characters.

    We need actual laws protecting our privacy in this country. The selective use of some Judge's reasoning doesn't cut it.
    I do agree with you in that we need actual laws to protect a person's privacy. However, it appears more logical that a Democratic Congress would protect the rights of citizens in this regard whereas it would be a cold day in hell for a Republican Congress to do so.
    Thanks from Friday13

  6. #6
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24,330
    Thanks
    4064

    From
    North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by DemoWhip View Post
    I do agree with you in that we need actual laws to protect a person's privacy. However, it appears more logical that a Democratic Congress would protect the rights of citizens in this regard whereas it would be a cold day in hell for a Republican Congress to do so.
    Politicians on both sides love to meddle in the private business of those they don't like and use it against them. This isn't a partisan issue. It's more of a cultural issue - and whether or not our private relationships and speech should be at the mercy of our employers - whether they be government or corporate. Because what good is the right to free speech and expression if you are then fired and your life ruined if you say or do something they don't approve of? Where is the so-called "right to privacy" in that?

    There isn't. And that is the point. We definitely need new laws protecting our privacy and shielding us from tyrannical employers. A corporation should not be able to fire you if you say something about Trump they don't like on Twitter or have sex with a co worker. And neither should the Government.
    Last edited by Jeremy; 12th February 2018 at 07:01 PM.
    Thanks from MaryAnne

  7. #7
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    54,727
    Thanks
    26246

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy View Post
    The right to privacy is an invention of the courts and no where in the constitution does it actually exist.
    "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." U.S. Const. amend. IX.

    The non-enumeration of a right is not a ground for denying that such a right exists. There may be other reasons a claimed right does not exist, but absence from the Constitution is not one of them.

  8. #8
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24,330
    Thanks
    4064

    From
    North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." U.S. Const. amend. IX.

    The non-enumeration of a right is not a ground for denying that such a right exists. There may be other reasons a claimed right does not exist, but absence from the Constitution is not one of them.
    The problem with your post is that I did not say such a right didn't exist. I said no where in the constitution does it actually exist - a point you just echoed with your own retort which basically just admitted it was absent from the constitution. So you are just making my point for me really so I should thank your post also.

    I actually do believe we have a right to privacy - which is why I would like to see it codified into law. That's the part of my post you conveniently chose to skip over and not include in your quote - thus taking my comment way out of context which I didn't much care for.

    So while you might be content with vague and subjective rights that aren't explicitly guarded by law in our constitution and left to the whims of what ever flavor of Judge we have this week - I'm not and would like to see it made so.
    Last edited by Jeremy; 12th February 2018 at 09:14 PM.

  9. #9
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,864
    Thanks
    405

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." U.S. Const. amend. IX.

    The non-enumeration of a right is not a ground for denying that such a right exists. There may be other reasons a claimed right does not exist, but absence from the Constitution is not one of them.
    I believe that the Ninth and Tenth Amendments are simply rules of construction and not regarding rights specifically.

  10. #10
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24,330
    Thanks
    4064

    From
    North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    I believe that the Ninth and Tenth Amendments are simply rules of construction and not regarding rights specifically.
    Our country is based on the principle that rights are inherent and do not come from Government. That's why the constitution left open a process to amend and add rights as the people saw fit.

    My point was that our privacy rights are not spelled out in the constitution or in law. They are instead the invention of judges and applied haphazardly as their subjective nonsense allows for - which is not sufficient. They need to be clarified and made into actual law.

    Now how on earth Ian interpreted my comment to mean I was trying to deny people a right to privacy is anyone's guess - as I was actually doing the exact opposite.
    Last edited by Jeremy; 12th February 2018 at 09:17 PM.
    Thanks from MaryAnne

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 16th May 2017, 02:42 PM
  2. Replies: 102
    Last Post: 13th February 2017, 04:31 PM
  3. 5th Circuit Contraception Decision
    By BDBoop in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 23rd June 2015, 08:18 PM
  4. Ninth Circuit Opinion on Same-Sex Marriage
    By heirtothewind in forum Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 8th October 2014, 01:21 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 6th September 2008, 05:23 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed