Religions > Atheism > Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"reeder" |
| Date: |
18 Oct 2005 09:11:36 AM |
| Object: |
Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
Miers Disavows Saying Constitution Protects Privacy
Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers
disavows telling a U.S. senator that she believes there's a
constitutional right to privacy, the lawmaker's spokesman said in a
statement...
Specter's spokesman, Bill Reynolds, said Miers called the senator
after reading news accounts of his comments about their conversation
to say Specter had misunderstood her position about privacy or the
1965 decision in Griswold v. Connecticut.
``In their meeting this afternoon Sen. Specter thought Ms. Harriet
Miers said she agreed with Griswold v. Connecticut and there was a
right to privacy in the Constitution,'' Reynolds said in the statement
emailed last night.
``Ms. Miers called him to say that he misunderstood her and that she
had not taken a position on Griswold or the privacy issue.'' Reynolds
said in the statement.
The 1965 Griswold decision held that Connecticut violated the
constitutional right to privacy of married couples by banning the sale
of contraceptives...
Former Indiana Senator Dan Coats, enlisted by the White House to help
shepherd the nomination through the Senate, was quoted in The
Washington Post as saying the Constitution's liberty clause implied a
right to privacy...
New Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said during his confirmation
hearing in September that the Constitution protects a right to
privacy.
< SNIP
.
|
|
| User: "Dale" |
|
| Title: Re: Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
18 Oct 2005 09:27:53 AM |
|
|
"reeder" <reeder@nomail.yu> wrote in message
news:oi0al1dksk3tbo658qdj7juim7um1c7ulf@4ax.com...
Miers Disavows Saying Constitution Protects Privacy
Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers
disavows telling a U.S. senator that she believes there's a
constitutional right to privacy, the lawmaker's spokesman said in a
statement...
She doesn't say the use of contraceptives may not be protected. But you
know, when you look at the Ninth Amendment, all bets are off when it comes
to the rights of US citizens. I mean, bets are off with regard to the Feds
deciding what rights we have.
Ninth Amendment to the US Constitution:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Winston Smith, American Patriot" |
|
| Title: Re: Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
18 Oct 2005 09:30:32 AM |
|
|
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in
news:JD75f.4850$7h7.2084@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:
"reeder" <reeder@nomail.yu> wrote in message
news:oi0al1dksk3tbo658qdj7juim7um1c7ulf@4ax.com...
Miers Disavows Saying Constitution Protects Privacy
Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers
disavows telling a U.S. senator that she believes there's a
constitutional right to privacy, the lawmaker's spokesman said in a
statement...
She doesn't say the use of contraceptives may not be protected. But
you know, when you look at the Ninth Amendment, all bets are off when
it comes to the rights of US citizens. I mean, bets are off with
regard to the Feds deciding what rights we have.
Ninth Amendment to the US Constitution:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
If you try hard enough, the 9th Amendment could be used to justify the
murder of all registered Democrats should a state be so disposed.
And you can bet that Miers, Scalia, and Thomas will be there to affirm
such a state law.
--
http://hume.realisticpolitics.com/
The real danger to the future of humanity is the preference
for surrendering to fear, superstition, and faith
in absolutist belief systems, and so to submit to these
willingly and to the control of those demagogues who
make use of these, rather than preferring
to reason with one's own mind.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
18 Oct 2005 04:23:17 PM |
|
|
Dale wrote:
"reeder" <reeder@nomail.yu> wrote in message
news:oi0al1dksk3tbo658qdj7juim7um1c7ulf@4ax.com...
Miers Disavows Saying Constitution Protects Privacy
Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers
disavows telling a U.S. senator that she believes there's a
constitutional right to privacy, the lawmaker's spokesman said in a
statement...
She doesn't say the use of contraceptives may not be protected. But you
know, when you look at the Ninth Amendment, all bets are off when it comes
to the rights of US citizens. I mean, bets are off with regard to the Feds
deciding what rights we have.
Ninth Amendment to the US Constitution:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The 9th was provided to ensure that all rights that we enjoyed prior to the
ratification of our Constitution would be retained. Thus if one could
demonstrate the right to a doctor-patient privacy privilege prior to 1796, then
the 9th would confirm that we still retain it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
19 Oct 2005 01:36:33 AM |
|
|
fester wrote:
Dale wrote:
"reeder" <reeder@nomail.yu> wrote in message
news:oi0al1dksk3tbo658qdj7juim7um1c7ulf@4ax.com...
Miers Disavows Saying Constitution Protects Privacy
Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet
Miers disavows telling a U.S. senator that she believes
there's a constitutional right to privacy, the lawmaker's
spokesman said in a statement...
She doesn't say the use of contraceptives may not be
protected. But you know, when you look at the Ninth Amendment,
all bets are off when it comes to the rights of US citizens. I
mean, bets are off with regard to the Feds deciding what
rights we have.
Ninth Amendment to the US Constitution:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall
not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the
people.
The 9th was provided to ensure that all rights that we enjoyed
prior to the
ratification of our Constitution would be retained. Thus if
one could demonstrate the right to a doctor-patient privacy
privilege prior to 1796, then the 9th would confirm that we
still retain it.
No, that is not what the 9th says.
This is a truely evil far right idea that needs to be ground
underheel and time some ***** tries to float this.
It means what it says, the list of rights is not to be used
to deny or disparage rights which are in fact retained by teh
people.
Privacy is not mentioned in Constitution nor bill of rights.
That is a right that cannot be taken away from us.
If you right wingers are going to make up evil additions to this
amendment that vcan be used to deny us rights, that is evil,
un-American, unpatriotic, and deeply un-American.
Yes it is true that in America, human rights has
often been more rhetoric than reality. Slavery, Jim
Crow Racism, anti-woman bigotry, religous bigoties of sundry
types.
That simply was wrong.
The idea that theer are unwritten rules that deny us rights
because some far right creep claims there was is also wrong as
much as Jim Crow racism.
I hereby proclaim any such claims as corrosively un-American and
anti-American and unpatriotic to an extreme.
Its creeping Nazism.
--
The official spokesman of the Foxes said
today that investigation into what happened
to the henhouse may be needed.
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
20 Oct 2005 05:06:06 PM |
|
|
wbarwell wrote:
fester wrote:
Dale wrote:
"reeder" <reeder@nomail.yu> wrote in message
news:oi0al1dksk3tbo658qdj7juim7um1c7ulf@4ax.com...
Miers Disavows Saying Constitution Protects Privacy
Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet
Miers disavows telling a U.S. senator that she believes
there's a constitutional right to privacy, the lawmaker's
spokesman said in a statement...
She doesn't say the use of contraceptives may not be
protected. But you know, when you look at the Ninth Amendment,
all bets are off when it comes to the rights of US citizens. I
mean, bets are off with regard to the Feds deciding what
rights we have.
Ninth Amendment to the US Constitution:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall
not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the
people.
The 9th was provided to ensure that all rights that we enjoyed
prior to the
ratification of our Constitution would be retained. Thus if
one could demonstrate the right to a doctor-patient privacy
privilege prior to 1796, then the 9th would confirm that we
still retain it.
No, that is not what the 9th says.
This is a truely evil far right idea that needs to be ground
underheel and time some ***** tries to float this.
It means what it says, the list of rights is not to be used
to deny or disparage rights which are in fact retained by teh
people.
Privacy is not mentioned in Constitution nor bill of rights.
That is a right that cannot be taken away from us.
If you right wingers are going to make up evil additions to this
amendment that vcan be used to deny us rights, that is evil,
un-American, unpatriotic, and deeply un-American.
Yes it is true that in America, human rights has
often been more rhetoric than reality. Slavery, Jim
Crow Racism, anti-woman bigotry, religous bigoties of sundry
types.
That simply was wrong.
The idea that theer are unwritten rules that deny us rights
because some far right creep claims there was is also wrong as
much as Jim Crow racism.
I hereby proclaim any such claims as corrosively un-American and
anti-American and unpatriotic to an extreme.
Its creeping Nazism.
You don't say. Now, let's try a little experiment. Let's see if Barwell can
put away insults, hysterics and hyperbole and defend his claims.
You say that you have a right to privacy. Tell us,
1. what does a right to privacy mean?
2. where does this right come from?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
21 Oct 2005 12:45:07 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 14:27:53 GMT, "Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net>
wrote:
"reeder" <reeder@nomail.yu> wrote in message
news:oi0al1dksk3tbo658qdj7juim7um1c7ulf@4ax.com...
Miers Disavows Saying Constitution Protects Privacy
Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers
disavows telling a U.S. senator that she believes there's a
constitutional right to privacy, the lawmaker's spokesman said in a
statement...
She doesn't say the use of contraceptives may not be protected. But you
know, when you look at the Ninth Amendment, all bets are off when it comes
to the rights of US citizens. I mean, bets are off with regard to the Feds
deciding what rights we have.
Ninth Amendment to the US Constitution:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
What 'Constitution?'
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Harry Hope" |
|
| Title: LIBERALS ARE FUN TO LAUGH AT ==> Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
18 Oct 2005 11:08:37 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:11:36 -0500, reeder <reeder@nomail.yu> wrote:
Miers Disavows Saying Constitution Protects Privacy
Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers
disavows telling a U.S. senator that she believes there's a
constitutional right to privacy, the lawmaker's spokesman said in a
statement...
Specter's spokesman, Bill Reynolds, said Miers called the senator
after reading news accounts of his comments about their conversation
to say Specter had misunderstood her position about privacy or the
1965 decision in Griswold v. Connecticut.
``In their meeting this afternoon Sen. Specter thought Ms. Harriet
Miers said she agreed with Griswold v. Connecticut and there was a
right to privacy in the Constitution,'' Reynolds said in the statement
emailed last night.
``Ms. Miers called him to say that he misunderstood her and that she
had not taken a position on Griswold or the privacy issue.'' Reynolds
said in the statement.
The 1965 Griswold decision held that Connecticut violated the
constitutional right to privacy of married couples by banning the sale
of contraceptives...
Former Indiana Senator Dan Coats, enlisted by the White House to help
shepherd the nomination through the Senate, was quoted in The
Washington Post as saying the Constitution's liberty clause implied a
right to privacy...
New Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said during his confirmation
hearing in September that the Constitution protects a right to
privacy.
< SNIP
.
|
|
|
| User: "LIBERATED MAN" |
|
| Title: Re: LIBERALS ARE FUN TO LAUGH AT ==> Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
18 Oct 2005 01:05:37 PM |
|
|
"torresD" <rivrvu@IX.NETC0M.C0M> wrote in message
news:2g7al15eus37rprb5jmav3si6fm5jtrlct@4ax.com...
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:11:36 -0500, reeder <reeder@nomail.yu> wrote:
Hi, torresD.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: LIBERALS ARE FUN TO LAUGH AT ==> Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
18 Oct 2005 01:30:04 PM |
|
|
But while neocon morons waste time in empty laughter, liberals are
busy preparing for 2008.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Spammeister" |
|
| Title: Re: Miers: Use of contraceptives may not be protected by constitution |
19 Oct 2005 06:05:40 AM |
|
|
Welcome back to the 18th century. It's where the Republican party is
trying to take us as rapidly as their legs can carry them. Libertarian
economics. Restrictive political rights. Religious faith over scientific
evidence. Back to the future!
reeder wrote:
Miers Disavows Saying Constitution Protects Privacy
Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers
disavows telling a U.S. senator that she believes there's a
constitutional right to privacy, the lawmaker's spokesman said in a
statement...
Specter's spokesman, Bill Reynolds, said Miers called the senator
after reading news accounts of his comments about their conversation
to say Specter had misunderstood her position about privacy or the
1965 decision in Griswold v. Connecticut.
``In their meeting this afternoon Sen. Specter thought Ms. Harriet
Miers said she agreed with Griswold v. Connecticut and there was a
right to privacy in the Constitution,'' Reynolds said in the statement
emailed last night.
``Ms. Miers called him to say that he misunderstood her and that she
had not taken a position on Griswold or the privacy issue.'' Reynolds
said in the statement.
The 1965 Griswold decision held that Connecticut violated the
constitutional right to privacy of married couples by banning the sale
of contraceptives...
Former Indiana Senator Dan Coats, enlisted by the White House to help
shepherd the nomination through the Senate, was quoted in The
Washington Post as saying the Constitution's liberty clause implied a
right to privacy...
New Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said during his confirmation
hearing in September that the Constitution protects a right to
privacy.
< SNIP
--
"Democracy is also a form of religion. It is the worship of jackals
by jackasses."
-- H. L. Mencken
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
