Frisk and seizure. This amendment, according to the Fourth Amendment, is all about: people’s right to security, protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, no violation, and that warrants should only be issued upon probable causes. Many scholars taking constitution consider this as the most freedom which has been ensured by the Bill of rights in comparison to all other freedoms. Without this protection, other important liberties like freedom of press, speech and religion could not be of existence. This right was drawn from the British experience of the 1600s and 1700s. It was at that time, when officials conducted unreasonable searches on private or individual residences. This was under the general warrants which had no specification on what had to be searched or seized. In this amendment, the framers expressed the British government’s policy of utilization of general warrants to justify searching the subjects. According to the modern court, all searches that have not been conducted by the judicial process, and with no judges or magistrates approval, are not reasonable. This is subject to few and delineated exceptions (Katz v. United States, 1967). A probable cause to intrude with someone’s privacy only exists when an enforcement officer, in possession of facts of a case, believes that a person has committed a certain crime. The stop and frisk program allows police to stop people when they have reasonable prove that a crime has or is about to take place. In such a case, it’s the officer’s duty to seek support from a judge or a magistrate who will issue him with a warrant. Personal privacy is essential or in other words, the right to be left alone (Justice Louis D). In most cases, the stop and frisk policy is not done in a discriminatory manner. Capital punishment and you. The cruel and unusual punishment clause, according to the eighth amendment, unusual punishments should be inflicted. It was in the late 1700s, when the authorization of death penalty for certain crimes like rape, robbery, forgery and adultery took place in many states. As time passed by, reform of the criminal law took place, and some states reduced and some went to the extent of eliminating the death eligible crimes. Rape and robbery are the most death eligible crimes. Death is in most cases done by hanging. This amendment is neither precise nor static. It’s perceived that its meaning is derived from the improvement of standards which show how the society is maturing progressively (Chief Justice Earl Warren 1958). The state should not inflict capital punishment, even I cases where the offense is so grave. This should only happen if it is the only perceived measure to prevent another similar crime from taking place (Professor George). Failure to execute offenders in cases where this would bring maximum protection to the commonwealth would mean the sates failure to perform its duties. As one Archbishop Fulton once said that, to not impose just punishment is cowardice and not mercy as many people would tend to think. In my opinion, I think death penalty should be abolished as there will forever be cases where execution of innocent people is done no matter how good the justice system is. It also violates the right to life which happens to be the most basic. This capital punishment undermines the human dignity which is very essential to all persons. There exist more effective measures to prevent crime rather than execution. Right to privacy Personal freedom When unauthorized invasion of a person’s general right to privacy in emotional and sensational cases take place, which results to violation of an essential right of liberty. For the progression of modern privacy doctrine, this lead to personal injury which is legally wrong (Warren and Brandeis, 1890). It is believed that privacy goes beyond property to individuals. Women have a right to use of contraception and family planning techniques as all these are legalized. Griswold constitutional right to privacy was so limited since it only applied in the marital bedroom cases. This means that those that are single do not have rights to receive contraceptives. In my opinion, if the right of privacy has a meaning, it’s an individual’s right, whether married or single, to have privacy. This means that a woman should not be subjected to unwarranted intrusion, involving matters that are so essential and affecting her decision about her bearing or begetting a child. It is seized that most people tend to give much importance on the sexual liberty idea and not ones personal privacy. Adultery, homosexuality and fornication should be always immune from criminal questioning. Couples intimacy in marriage institution is very essential and therefore, the state should not only allow it, but also foster and protect it. (Harlan) The court also sustains that a woman should have consent to go through an abortion and that she should have assurance that everything will remain confidential between her and her doctor. The right to personal privacy is so broad that it encompasses the decision of a woman on whether to keep or terminate pregnancy. Discrimination and the future of marriage. Equality is a fundamental right which is so basic in the American social and political culture. The constitution states that there should be equal protection of rights and therefore no person should be denied that. The equal protection clause describes that everyone born or naturalized is a citizen in the State where he/she resides in. Therefore, there should be no enforcement of any type of law which would deprive them of the privileges of the States. There should be no State abridging people of their liberty or life without involving the law during that process. The modern constitution is so into sexual equality among men and women. This is seen in cases where job opportunities do not depend on a person’s sexuality. Most State unions also have women as their leaders as there are equal opportunities on both sexual genders. Racism also affects equality thus leading to discrimination. The constitution has equal rights between the blacks and the whites in America. Racism is done through identification of where a person comes from and therefore judgments are easily made. This lead to “otherness” a condition in which one feels that he/she doesn’t belong in a certain place. Defense of marriage act mandates discrimination of legally married couples of same sex. When it comes to DOMA, same sex couples do not have important protections which include medical leave and they are unfairly taxed when they put resources together as a family. For relief of same sex couples marriages to be achieved, the government must intervene by respecting all marriages in the States. Every married couple should have equal rights from the federal government in spite of where they live or come from. References Ford, James (2012) Stop And Frisk: How Controversial NYPD Practice Affects Real People. John R. Quinn, Archbishop of San Fransisco ( 1989). Abortion: The Axe at the Root Of All Human Rights. Jeffrey, Don; Dolmetsch, Chris (2012). Defense of Marriage Act Unconstitutional, Appeals Court Says. J. Blume, Michigan Law Review (2005) “Killing the willing: Volunteers, Suicide and Competency.