You may, of late, hear far right organizations pretending to care about the right to privacy. Often, they appeal to children’s rights to privacy when they spill their malicious bile against the rights of transgender students. Every fascist movement requires a current, trendy target – and as of now, trans Americans are it.

Let’s get one gigantic caveat out of the way: Far right MAGA groups are not advocates for children’s rights. They hate the very concept of children’s rights with a blood-boiling passion, often when frantically coveting their alleged right to abuse their children, even as they laughably pretend to support children’s rights when the topic is abortion.

So, what does MAGA really think of the Constitutional right to privacy that they are now trying to use as a crowbar for their latest trendy flavor of bigotry? (The right to privacy is inherent in the Fourth Amendment. If there were no right to privacy, then the Fourth Amendment would have no reason to exist. No right to privacy? Then who needs a stinkin’ warrant?)

The listed hate group Family Research Council issued this denigration of the right to privacy: “The Right to Privacy and the De-Moralization of Sexuality.“

Far right columnist David Limbaugh (yes, the brother of that guy), spits cobra venom on the Constitutional right to privacy: “It would be an eradication of that gross judicial decision that usurped state authority over the issue based on a constitutional right to privacy that exists nowhere but in their imaginations.”

The far right Focus On The Family Citizen relayed this mouthful of sulfuric acid at the right to privacy: “BRANCH: The reason I disagree with Roe has nothing to do with going to church on Sunday. That’s a bad decision because it’s based on a legal fiction, better known as the “right to privacy.” Now you go ahead and show me [in the Constitution] where the framers mention the word “privacy.” You can’t, because it’s not in there …”

The right to privacy “isn’t in there” because it is so obviously a natural right that the Founders didn’t foresee a need to itemize it! Does anyone really believe that the Founders debated whether or not we have a right to privacy and decided against it? Ridiculous!

They assumed that the right to privacy existed when they crafted the Fourth Amendment! The right to privacy was one of those “no shit, Sherlock” rights! That’s why they added the Ninth Amendment!!

Watergate felon and author of far-right radio spots Chuck Colson expectorates his own flavor of camel spit at the right to privacy: “In contrast, the so-called “right to privacy,” which has been at the heart of many of the Supreme Court’s recent decisions, has only self-interest in mind. The right to privacy—which is not even in the Constitution, but rather has been “found” by an activist court—started with the sexual revolution and has led to many so-called “rights” that are similarly self-centered.” WOW, you can just feel his caustic hatred for our basic right to privacy. If he were alive today, he’d be making a YouTube video depicting a semi-automatic rifle obliterating the Bill of Rights.

Former House Fascist Whip Tom DeLay said this in an interview with the Washington Times: “Not zealous. I blame Congress over the last 50 to 100 years for not standing up and taking its responsibility given to it by the Constitution. The reason the judiciary has been able to impose a separation of church and state that’s nowhere in the Constitution is that Congress didn’t stop them. The reason we had judicial review is because Congress didn’t stop them. The reason we had a right to privacy is because Congress didn’t stop them.“

Far right control-freak Rick Santorum, one of the “freshmen Republican” senators swept into power by the 1994 “Wave of Hate” election, came up with the sorts of lulus that only a dyed-in-the-wool pervert could even conceive of: “Again, it goes back to this moral relativism, which is very accepting of a variety of different lifestyles. And if you make the case that if you can do whatever you want to do, as long as it’s in the privacy of your own home, this “right to privacy,” then why be surprised that people are doing things that are deviant within their own home?” … “AP: The right to privacy lifestyle? SANTORUM: The right to privacy lifestyle.” It’s worth pointing out that the 1994 “freshmen class” would have been just fine with the Jan. 6th insurrection.

MAGA fundamentalist pee-pee policeman Albert Mohler has this to say about our right to privacy: “What reversing Roe did was to reverse that infamous 1973 Supreme Court decision that supposedly found a right to an abortion within a so-called right to privacy. Neither of which of course are articulated in the U.S. Constitution.”

Focus on the Family’s political organ Daily Citizen denigrates the right to privacy thusly: “With Dobbs and the reversal of Roe, the High Court returned the issue of abortion to the states where it had previously existed. It was the 1965 Griswold decision that manufactured out of whole cloth a so-called right to privacy.” Come, feel the hate!

Pecker-obsessed pervert “magicmanzach” said on the everything2.com website, “Do you see the words “right to privacy” in there? Neither do I. This leads me to agree completely with the Justice’s opinion. Strong enforcement of Christian moral laws is the only thing that can reverse this deadly tide of liberalism.” At least the raging sexual obsessive-compulsive said the quiet part out loud.

The ninth-magnitude right-wing star “Mark A. Rose” dropped this deuce on the right to privacy in this May 4th, 2005 gem: “Thus, if the Supreme Court were to adhere to a strict interpretation of the Constitution, then Roe v. Wade, the alter at which the left worships, would be ruled unconstitutional, because Roe v. Wade is built upon a “right to privacy” the Supreme Court, in 1973, suddenly realized that James Madison had written into the Constitution 186 years earlier. In reality, the right to abortion doesn’t exist anywhere in that document. Like so much of liberalism, the right to privacy is a myth.” (Oh, and learn how to spell “altar,” graduate.)

The pee-pee, po-po and pudenda police, “Citizens for Community Values,” vented similar hatred for our right to privacy – and revealed exactly why. In its August 2003 Courier, they fulminate, “More important that the protection of public morality, the six appointed justices decided, was the plaintiffs’ “right to privacy.” This “right to privacy,” however, does not appear in the Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court, itself, actually invented this concept in 1965 in the case, Griswold v. Connecticut. In Griswold, the Court discovered this “right to privacy” not in the actual text of the Constitution, but in something referred to as “emanations” issuing from “penumbras” surrounding the text.” WOW! Feel the hate!

Well, have I proved my charge that MAGA, despite the false face that they present when it serves their bigotry, hates the very concept of our right to privacy with the heat of a thousand supernovae?

When it becomes this evident how utterly obsessed and fixated they are on the travels and adventures of other people’s private parts, it’s no wonder why it is MAGA itself that is home to so many scandals of sexual abuse and perversion.

They can’t stop thinking about it!