Alright, I have a question to be asked. Do Democrats have a different Constitution than the one I have? In yet another glaring misstatment of the Constitution, Senate Judiciary Committee member Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said in a prepared statement today (as reported by the Washington Post) that she intends to ask Judge Roberts "about 'the constitutional right to privacy' as it deals with abortion rights."
Just to be sure, I checked my copy of the Constitution and I find no "right to privacy" in the Constitution. From cover to cover, start to finish, Preamble to the 27th Amendment--there is no right to privacy in it. I have mentioned this topic before in this space.
While the Senator has the right to ask Judge Roberts about his legal views on abortion rights, she cannot ask him about the existence of a right that does not exist!!
Now of course, some Lefty is going to say something about an implied right to privacy, but implications are subject to interpretation. How I define right to privacy is not how my wife would define it. Neither of us are wrong in our definition and our views have little impact on the world other than our dinner table conversations. But the danger with a judge having a subjective interpretation of a "right" to privacy is in the inconsistent application of the law.
Finally, when will we as citizens begin to demand more from our elected representatives. How can Senator Feinstein, who serves on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee not know what is actually written in the Constitution?
I challenge anyone who reads this to send me the quotation, clause, section or Amendment that describes a right to privacy from the U.S. Constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment