Re: "right to privacy","
James you've turn the entire issue into a drawn out court battle which would take lawyers, judge and jury months to come to a suppositional conclusion with. So nothing is solved but the sureness of legal debate. I am sure that everyone knows what they consider "theirs" and when and who has violated "their" time, space, property and legal rights. It is simply a matter of each individual's tolerance to audacity that keeps most issues out of the courts and suppositional judgement of other's is what I was referring to.
IMO most of us get in trouble when we allow our rights to be abused at the time the abuse is taking place. To (a word you used six times in your opinionated post) "suppose" someone has the right to come into your house, go into your closet, take your property and use it for their benefit is far beyond the right to privacy in my book. Just like the person who jumped over the fence in your example was considered legally wrong to enter private property without ever entering the house, so too would anyone going into my closet without ever taking anything be just as wrong.
Most thieves, scoundrels, scallywags and ill-mannered rogues pretty much know where the easy marks are and likewise where they will get in real trouble by stepping over their bounty.
So you see I think where you and I differ, I view the "right to privacy" as a God given and inalienable right, where you seem to think it must be litigated, legislated and legalized before someone has it.
TTOSBT |
