|
As
America looks toward the upcoming presidential election,
most people consider the issues of the day such as
the economy, foreign relations, military spending,
tax cuts, the deficit and abortion.
But wait! Abortion
was decided three decades ago and the right of a women
to choose has become an integral part of our common
law. So why have a so called "litmus test" for the
appointment of judges to the U.S. Supreme Court? Why
rehash the issues of the 1970's in the 21st Century
when a much more important issue is at stake? The
issue, people, is personal privacy!
When the founding fathers
(excuse me; let's be politically correct) the founding
"persons" wrote the Bill of Rights, they gave an individual
the right to be secure in their homes (i.e., personal
property.) This was before personal computers, cell
phones, parabolic microphones, and all of our modern
means of communications. In the 1960's, the Supreme
Court decided that the 4th Amendment protected individuals
and their reasonable expectation of privacy. This
will be, perhaps, the major issue before the Supreme
Court for the next three decades. The man America
elects
in November will appoint two, maybe three, judges
to that court.
|
|
Most
individuals want to be protected from major crime
and may feel that this will not personally effect
them, but let's review some recent actions along this
line:
 A
recent CBS Eye on America reported on individuals
who's employers disciplined and even terminated their
employment based on data acquired while an individual
was at work. One employee of a company was let go
for installing personal software on a company computer
to help them do their job more efficiently.
Florida
Public Radio covered the story of state employees
disciplined for visiting porno web sites at work.
If employers and state government can intrude into
an employee's reasonable expectation of privacy, what
can the Federal Government do with all its resources?
Another
important concern with privacy has developed with
the expansion of our knowledge of genetics and the
ability to predict the probability of inherited diseases.
This medical advance could effect employment and an
individual's ability to acquire health insurance in
the future. Should and employer or insurance company
be allowed to examine an individual's genetic map
prior to employment or the issuing of an insurance
policy? Can an individual be charged a higher rate
or denied a policy because they are genetically predisposed
to an illness such as breast or prostate cancer? These
issues are sure to be heard before future Supreme
Courts. How the court will rule on these privacy issues
can and will effect you.
|
|
Another important concern
with privacy has developed with the expansion of our
knowledge of genetics and the ability to predict the
probability of inherited diseases. This medical advance
could effect employment and an individual's ability
to acquire health insurance in the future. Should
and employer or insurance company be allowed to examine
an individual's genetic map prior to employment or
the issuing of an insurance policy?
Can an individual be
charged a higher rate or denied a policy because they
are genetically predisposed to an illness such as
breast or prostate cancer? These issues are sure to
be heard before future Supreme Courts. How the court
will rule on these privacy issues can and will effect
you.
As
America looks at the candidates--though they may be
Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber--we should ask ourselves
"Is abortion really the issue before
the courts?" It's an emotional issue, true, but the
subject of privacy will effect us and generations
yet to come. The issue of privacy will most probably
effect not only the way we conduct public business,
but our private lives as well. Who would nominate
judges with personal privacy in mind?
|
