The concept of privacy is an American ideology often believed to be an inalienable right.  Anonymity handed down from the heavens and bestowed upon each citizen as a reward for existence.  However the right to privacy is relative and fluctuating daily.  Many foreign languages do not have a word for privacy.  The English word is substituted and the ‘r’ rolled.  Dense urban fabrics, lack of suburban developments and poverty in many parts of the world, cause families to live and more close quarters and eliminates the illusions of privacy.

The recent Mark Foley scandal has exposed not only disgraceful and deplorable acts by an esteemed member of congress, but has uncovered the relativity of privacy as described by more liberal political factions.  In December of 2005, Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein, Carl Levin and Ron Wyden, as well as GOP Sens. Chuck Hagel and Olympia Snowe authored and sent a letter to the Senate's Judiciary and Intelligence committees stating,

"We write to express our profound concern about recent revelations that the United States government may have engaged in domestic electronic surveillance without appropriate legal authority.”. 

A noble endeavor was engaged by the before mentioned representatives as they attempt to defend the right of privacy for the unsuspecting American public.  Why an ordained right needs to be defended by a mere mortal is beyond my understanding and comprehension? The privacy crusaders alleviate my paranoia and have allowed the destruction of many aluminum foil protective head pieces.

When Mark Foley's repulsive, flirtatious and disgraceful instant message communications were discovered, who spoke out about his privacy.  If privacy is an ordained right akin to free speech, free press or freedom of religion, the privacy activists should be jumping at the chance with help from the ACLU to defend this man's creepy right to privacy.  Needless to say this band wagon is empty.  Diane Feinstein released a public statement about the scandal on her website feinstein.senate.gov on Wednesday, October 4, 2006, describing her displeasure with the situation.  The statement read as follows:

“This case to me is replete with violations of the public trust and could be well lead to criminal charges.  Mr. Foley has resigned from the House of Representatives.  It's now up to law enforcement to vigorously pursue all evidence to determine whether criminal prosecution is warranted.  With respect to the Republican leadership, it is unclear that there was knowledge of improper, immoral, and possibly criminal behavior, and the leadership did nothing about it.  That leadership should go as well.”

No mention of civil rights violation upon Senator Mark Foley.  No concern over what types of domestic spying were introduced to obtain these infamous emails and instant messages.  If Mark Foley has engaged in lewd or lascivious conduct with a person under the age of consent, he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  However America must be careful of the double standard displayed by the prior quotes.

If the FBI wishes to disrupt a terror plot and save the lives of the American people, our God given right to privacy supersedes the need for the public good.  If a Republican Senator is talking dirty to a young man, his right to privacy is forgone in the name of twenty four hour news and political advancement.  Privacy is relative in America and almost extinct or nonexistent in the rest of the world.  I take pleasure in my privacy.  Privacy achieved by the mere fact that no one cares what I do.  I am simply not on the radar screen.  The illusion of privacy is often nothing more than anonymity. What kind of world will we be living in when a terrorist has a greater right to privacy than a United States Senator?

But no one listens to me

-Patriotic Progeny

Posted: 09/22/07