@JD~Jordan I am aware of those parameters in the Law concerning communications. Comm Theory is one of my majors. The law has never been realistic in the region of privacy, which it has very vaguely defined in only a few landmark cases. I have considered the issue, and come up with wording as follows:
All human beings have the right to privacy, which shall be the authority to determine those things concerning themselves and their dependents in regards to their associations with persons, places, things, ideas, the use of their time, the locations where they spend their time, the purposes for which they act or choose not to act, and the manner of their action to which the general public shall have access to know.
No human being shall be denied privacy, save when they explicitly waiving such right in specificity, regardless of age, disability, familial status, genetic information, national origin, pregnancy, political standing, race, religion, sex, social standing, or veteran status except when such privacy shall deny or obstruct the right to life, liberty, or property of another.
To that end, they may make public that which they choose to publish in whatsoever manner and may retain as private that which they do not consent to have published.
Further, a human being shall maintain that right to privacy through the due process of law in the face of any action that may affect their life, liberty, or property the actionable results of which has not become a public record upon conviction.
Nor shall any right to privacy interfere with a parent's, custodian's, or guardian's right to know the events taking place in their child's or dependent's life or the life of one for whom they have a reasonable expectation of personal concern.
Nevertheless, no such rights to privacy shall prevail for those aiding, abetting, or participating in treason, insurgency, or war against the United States, its members, nor its allies.
