People of conscience can not separate themselves from their beliefs. The recent intrusion by the Presidents Healthcare law is an example. WIth one side of his mouth, or brain..he claimed his religious belief as a Christian..he used that to enforce his belief that what he is doing is for public good..and I have to believe, thats what he believes. However, at the same time, under the guise of doing what is right, and using his faith as what urges him to do so..he  crosses the line of government as servants of God..which cant happen just by the fact that not all men think alike, even if they claim to all be servants of the higher good.

This is now evident with the RCC. ..I heard someone liken this violation of religious conscience in this easily understandable way..He said: I'm an owner of a Jewish Kosher Deli..my employees want to pork sandwiches, they want me to pay for it, serve it, and put on the menu"...and I would add ..free of charge and with no co-pay..and we make believe someone else is going to pay for it!  

"where does the USConst. clearly state and define a "right to privacy".

i am happy to find it in the 9th amendment, and in the recognition that the government is the property and the employee of the people.  Not the reverse.

That anyone is STILL fussing over The (supposed, NON)Right to Privacy in The U. S. Constitution makes me really, really, REALLY glad that we gave Robert Bork the heave-ho ...

Feb 11, 2012 -- 4:03PM, lulu2 wrote:

The irony is..the HARVARD LAW Professor..thought he was God..now we all know the TRUTH!

Who exactly thought he was God?? Obama ?? I don't think so. But he should have listened to Biden.

Feb 11, 2012 -- 3:06PM, Rgurley4 wrote:

The "WALL" was not created by Jefferson!

Jefferson just came up with the term. The wall wall was built by the Framers in Article VI Paragraph 3 and the First Amendment. They had seen the problems that existed in theocratic colonies such as Massachusetts Bay, Connecticut, and Virginia. The churches do not have the constitutional power to make laws or interpret the laws.

Feb 11, 2012 -- 3:06PM, Rgurley4 wrote:

It was created by a succession of federal and state court cases that stretched the 1st Amendment beyond its clear words and intent.

No they didn't. They interpreted the Constitution correctly. Anyone who listens to David Barton and WallBuilders has no idea what the original intent of the Framers was. The Constitution is a living document. That's why the Framers provided for amendments. In 1789 only white male property owners could vote. Now every citizen over age 18 can.

Feb 11, 2012 -- 3:06PM, Rgurley4 wrote:

For a "constitutionalist" who believes that the Supremes should not "MAKE LAW", this FACT is VERY "relevant" and material...your Honor!

SCOTUS doesn't make law. They interpret it based on the conditions and challenges of each generation. The 4^th Amendment doesn't mention electronic methods of communication because the Framers never considered the concept of it.

Feb 11, 2012 -- 3:06PM, Rgurley4 wrote:

For example, where does the USConst. clearly state and define a "right to privacy"

It doesn't! It was a "penumbral" right invented by the SCOTUS.

It doesn't have to actual state the words "right to privacy." It is implied in the 3^rd, 4^th, 5^th, & 9^th Amendments.