Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

My Opinion: The originally meaning of this law was more effective at the time of the American Revolution. It prevented British soldiers from staying in private homes without the consent of the owners. This was more of a guarantee of civil liberties then anything. With the advancement of everything from our technology to our protection, I don't think this amendment is particularly important for us now. Our Armed Forces are so taken care of that they would never need to stay in citizens homes. And for some reason if they did, I'm hoping that most Americans would be kind enough and proud enough of their country that they would open their doors without hesitation if a crisis occured.

**Since this is so irrelevant to us in the 21st Century, people have taken this meaning to a privacy issue. Does the government have the right to our privacy? No I don't belive they do. If a person wants to do something then they have the freedom to make that choice to do it.

Third Amendment with Bob Badnarick



My Opinion: I think the most important thing to remember from this video is that our military is so advanced that I hardly doubt we will have to worry about this happening. Property is the main point if this Amendment and just like Bob Badnarick said "If we don't fight for our property then what will we fight for?"

Griswald vs. Connecticut (1965)

Facts of the Case: Griswold was the Executive Director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut. Both she and the Medical Director for the League gave information, instruction, and other medical advice to married couples concerning birth control. Griswold and her colleague were convicted under a Connecticut law which criminalized the provision of counselling, and other medical treatment, to married persons for purposes of preventing conception.

Question: Does the Constitution protect the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on a couple's ability to be counseled in the use of contraceptives?

Conclusion: Though the Constitution does not explicitly protect a general right to privacy, the various guarantees within the Bill of Rights create penumbras, or zones, that establish a right to privacy. Together, the First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth Amendments, create a new constitutional right, the right to privacy in marital relations. The Connecticut statute conflicts with the exercise of this right and is therefore null and void.DecisionsDecision: 7 votes for Griswold, 2 vote(s) against

My Opinion: It think that this case is a little extreme. People take birth control all over the country, but it is this specific group of people who get convicted. It is a doctor's respobsiblity to help their patients with what ever their problems is, and that is all he was doing. The patients have the option to listen to the advice or throw it out the window. They are not forced to do nothing.