What idea was the decision in griswold v. connecticut based upon? if the constitution forbids self-incrimination, husbands and wives should not be forced to testify against each other. the constitution cannot possibly include all rights, so judges can create new ones based on what the founders must have been thinking. if the constitution forbids unreasonable searches, there must be a reasonable right to privacy. the constitution does not meet everyone’s needs, so citizens can disregard laws when they think the government is violating their rights.

The decision in Griswold v. Connecticut was based in the idea that, if the Constitution forbids unreasonable searches, there must be a reasonable right to privacy.

Explanation:

Griswold v. Connecticut is a ruling by the Supreme Court that affirmed the constitutionality of the right to privacy. The subject of the case was a revision of Connecticut law prohibiting the sale of contraceptives.

The court almost unanimously acknowledged that the right to privacy is contained in the Constitution. However, since the guarantees of this right are not given in plain text, the judges disagreed as to which article of the Constitution should be guided in making the decision. In a convergent opinion, Arthur Goldberg based his decision on the basis of the Ninth Amendment. John Marshall Harlan and Byron White considered that the right to privacy was ensured by the right to a fair trial of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The precedent established by this case was repeatedly used by the Supreme Court. The most important decision, referring to Griswold v. Connecticut, was Roe v. Wade.

c

Explanation:

as university of miami psychologists debra lieberman and adam smith pointed out in a recent article in the journal current directions in psychological science, humans have social and psychological mechanisms to deter incest. with very few exceptions, marriages between brothers and sisters and between parents and their children are verboten in every human culture. the primary psychological anti-incest mechanism is the yuck response. even the idea of sex with their mom or dad, bro or sis is upsetting to most people. the psychologist jonathan haidt has found that nearly everyone is repelled by the prospect of brother-sister sex, even in hypothetical situations in which there is no chance of pregnancy).

the biological cost of incest

this raises an interesting question: just what’s so bad about incest? sure, having sex with your dad or your sister seems gross — but why? some anthropologists have argued that incest taboos are learned social conventions. this explanation, however, doesn’t make sense to me as it does not explain the widespread existence of anti-incest mechanisms in creatures ranging from cockroaches to chimpanzees. second, the incest taboo is about as close to a universal law as human moral rules get.

why should mechanisms to avoid incest be so widespread both in nature and across human societies? the answer is simple. the problem with having sex close with relatives is that there is an astonishingly high chance that your offspring will be born with a serious birth defect.

well to answer ur question to be completly honest