Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (1662)	5/31/2003 2:09:32 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793774

Well John, I see you are still trying to duck doing any homework whatsever. I had to read all the relevant case law and discuss it till my head was going to explode in undergrad. You obviously haven't even cracked a case book to look and see what end is up. Just clinging to "I'm right, because I say so, so nyah." The case law regarding privacy rights that pertains to this case, and which the gay couple are appealing to, DERIVED FROM cases such as Griswold v Connecticut - a case of a married couple who wanted contraceptives. All this, of course, is perfectly explained in the article Bill posted, which you obstinently continue to believe you know the better of. You haven't offered any support for your argument other than "I say so." Doesn't fly John. You're wrong, whether you admit to it or not. Derek