Privacy, a Human Right or a necessity for an Enlightened Society
Is that my sunset?
Nowadays privacy seems to revolve around sex.
Don't Ask Don't Tell. The concept itself is righteous. Apply it to religious belief and we all get it. Apply it to sexual preference and it seems like it should be just plain generally accepted. But it is not.
And so it is, that privacy is just as much about keeping in private on your own. In intellectual property law there is a well settled notion that if you put your invention out in the public eye before you patent it, you cannot have a protect-able patent. The fun case on it was a man who made a corsette/girdle for his wife. Oh my! to show it off, she wore it to a ball/social event. It was held that he had placed it in the public domain. Makes one wonder just how loosey goosey this gal was!
The point is that if you want something kept private then keep it that way. But do not come complaining if you put it out there.
So the paranoid freak has more of an expectation of privacy than the exhibitionist. The user that erases his internet search history every day, more than one like me who never does. Even the guy that uses his birth date for a pin number is less entitled than the guy that uses a number sequence reflecting a dogs' name which died before he was born.
I hope we get the picture.
How much do you do?
Are you never seen naked?
I do reckon I change some folks lives, so they have a right to know about me.
Now let us address reporters and lawyers and priests and married people.
A wife cannot be compelled to give testimony about private marital matters against her husband. A lawyers' client can demand that what was said between him and his lawyer is privileged and the lawyer must obey. The priest at a confessional cannot reveal what was revealed to him. A reporter must not reveal the source of information if it was given confidentially. That there is pretty black and white with very little gray area and that coming in the context usually of a third party present or not relevant as it was just conversation with no expectation of privacy.
So along comes shades of gray: A man has a law degree but is not licensed, he preaches but is not ordained, he is in a common law marriage (no certificate) and he writes online reporting on issues of the day. His wife comes to him along with their daughter, and reveals that she killed someone. Hmmmm, Can the man make that public?
Privacy and honesty sometimes conflict.
What expectation of privacy does the woman have?
I do believe that she should expect and be confident in her private discussions. I do not want the government to be in my head or private conversations.
So we ask ourselves about the Fox reporter targeted and the AP info improperly garnered and we say: Is there anything more important than our right to privacy.
(loosen up your panties,,, the woman only thought because she did not give a homeless man money, that his death from exposure and alcoholism was her fault)
My government should stay out of my business --- does that extend to Automatic Weapons, perhaps, does it extend to freedom of the press and the sanctity of marriage and faith based communications, for sure. Guard your rights please so that others can enjoy them.
Love is a private affair
People who do PDA's are just fine, I suppose. But somehow they want the world to know. I remember a man and a woman about 9 years ago, embracing in front of a beautiful moonlit fountain in a place called Balboa Park. Idealic is an understatement. Boojum Trees and lilies the size of car tire, a rose garden giving of scent in Florida Canyon, a giant lemon tree and Bougenvillias lining the 1909 architecture. And they embraced naturally, and now have a beautiful child with more love than reality and more caring than proof will ever be.
And so their love was public I do suppose. But it was private and could not be penetrated by camera or intruder. That, for the whole world to see was private. And to this day they gather the boy child and do a circle hug. That is private but the world is still welcome.
The writer writes of the most intimate details, and shares feelings. Moonlit nights and stormy fights are shared and made into bigger more important things than they might have been. Yet there is another thing about the writer. They confront on a daily basis and actually put into words that which normal people blow over and would rather forget than consider. It makes them a bit different. Good or bad different is hard to tell, but different.
I reckon, big old world that my moral is that a writer has no privilege. We write the most private details and share our most intimate details, and filet our hearts for the world to see. A writer has no privacy.
Somehow this book got written, was there any exptectation of privacy?
What a sac concept. That is not a violation privacy that is a violation of respect. To repeat what someone says when you were not a witness is not appropriate. If I were to say there is one thing that people who do not like churches have a beef with it is gossip. Every church I have ever been in has the problem.
And so does every school I have attended. And so has every large company I have ever worked with and it is not confined to certain nationalities, cultures, sex, race or age.
So gossip makes people often afraid to act --- and that is horrible.