Google Champions Right to Privacy

Recently, our commander in chief (ok, the Department of Justice) demanded that several internet search engines hand over user data and search information. Every single one of them had absolutely no qualms with delivering this information to the DOJ except for one. Thank you, Google, for helping protect my privacy. Google responded to the request with words like “vague” and “intended to harass” which can be effectively used to describe our government as a whole post-9/11. Little justification can be made for this kind of request.

In fact, it all stems from legislation signed by President Clinton that invoked criminal sentencing for distribution of material “harmful to minors.” The wording of the legislation leaves a lot of question as to what might be “harmful” when it comes to web content. It is intended, primarily, to stop children from encountering porn on the internet. One question that arises there is “how does porn hurt people?”, but I digress.

It is sickening that our Right to privacy has fallen by the wayside for expedience from an organization as inexpedient as the government. I mean, seriously, who here hasn't used Google to search for something? Ok, maybe you don't like Google. Have you used Yahoo? They were one of the companies that handed over the search data. Feel safer now? I didn't think so.

I wonder if the federal government could be described as “harmful to minors.” Considering the dangerous cycles that 'Welfare' creates it could be said that the government does very little to help minors. Additionally, many courts have been trying minors as adults in capital cases. Wouldn't that be “harmful?” This doesn't even attempt to account for the millions of children in government run foster care that are severely mistreated.

I think that these politicians are most certainly in no place to begin telling us what is 'harmful' when they are slaughtering children in the Middle East. Unintentional or not, they're still killing them. Every war results in collateral damage; this I know. What I don't know is if the value of a “win” is going to be worth the aforementioned damage. Can you even win a war on an idea? But back to the latest violation of our Rights.

Google has decided that our privacy is more important to them than some stupid beaurocrat saying “I'm from the government and I'm here to help.” If more of us stood up for our Rights, perhaps we wouldn't have to wait for big corporations to do it. Why can't we be the ones shouting “No! We want our Right to privacy!”?

Of course, this begs the question, where do we get the Right to privacy? Some might argue that it stems from the Fourth Amendment. Though I would agree that this action violates the Fourth Amendment, this is not where we get a right to privacy. Our Right to do anything that doesn't hurt someone, enslave someone, or steal something is expressly written in the Bill of Rights. It is the 9th Amendment. It reads:

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

I would hope that most college students can understand these words, but lets define a couple of the more ancient ones.

construe – to interpret
disparage - to reduce in esteem or rank
enumeration - to count off or name one by one

We have a lot of Rights specifically listed in the Constitution, but those that aren't listed are just as valuable. We can bear arms, but we can also sleep on tin foil. We have a Right to wear hats and a Right to assemble peaceably. The document was specifically written to avoid the badly worded argument that there is no Right to privacy, but, in case you were confused, I've cleared it up for you.

We have a Right to be as secretive as we desire. No one should tell us otherwise. This is especially true of the hypocrites who call themselves our representatives. I'm growing tired of these idiots ignoring the Constitution until a judge tells them otherwise. Maybe it's time for a change.