Of course you have a choice. You will never be absolutely forced to fly, thus it is voluntary. Thank you for pointing out that it is a faster option than other methods of transportation, It wasn't obvious.

In addition to that, thank you for pointing out the obvious in regards to the 9/11 attacks. Apparently you didn't realize that what I was bringing up is the general fact that after an attack so large security will inevitably increase. Most evaluations of airport security place it as lackluster at best even with searches. The airlines and the government would be criticized if they did not search bags. Apparently you are not very concerned with airline security, but I'm sure those responsible for the Airlines and those responsible for Federal airline security see searching bags for bombs that could kill the passengers of an airplane as relavent to the safety of those flying.

"There is not “no damage.” A friend of mine had his bag searched for bombs, and they found a small amount of harmless pot — something they had no reason to search him for — and arrested him"
That is an absolutely terrible example of damage to personal possessions. With that reasoning, you could claim that damage is caused when people are arrested for having a bomb in their suitcase, of course it damages people. You seem to believe that because the airport security is not specifically searching for drugs, your friend should not have been arrested for having marijuana in is bag. Regardless of your position on marijuana legalization, carrying it in any quantity without medical reason backed up by a doctor's recommendation and perscription is still a federal crime. What if airline personnel find 3 kg of cocaine in a suitcase, should they not arrest the person in possession of the cocaine because it was not what they were searching for? Like possession of marijuana, it is still a federal crime in the United States, and as such, the government is well within its rights arresting someone who has illegal substances in the suitcase, even if they are not searching it for the express purpose of finding those substances.

"If you feel we should start searching everybody as they go about their everday lives, then rewrite the 4th amendment"
I think I made it clear that flying on an airline is completely voluntary, and thus, it is your choice whether or not you want your bags searched. I don't think people should be searched without probable cause, per the 4th amendment. Its a bit ironic that after you criticize my tone you suggest for no reason that I am advocating something that goes completely against the U.S. Constitution.

"Seriously. If what you want is so popular, you can get the 2/3rds votes needed."
Popularity has nothing to do with it, I don't know why you wrote this sentence. If you feel that you or your personal effects have been hurt in any way by a government employee performing a search which you knew would happen yet still submitted your possessions to, then why don't you sue for damages. I'm not completely sure, but I think that there is even a branch of government that handles that sort of claim and even interperates whether or not laws (such as the ability of airport security to search bags) are Constitutional. I don't know if you just wanted to sell some tape, but maybe you should look into it if you care that much about it.