Well today is the day that the US Supreme Court will rule whether or not the Texas Sodomy Law is constitutional. It's 3:30 AM and I can't sleep from thinking about it. My faith in the U.S. government hangs in the balance and I'm just expecting the worst. I mean if gays & lesbians can't win this battle then what hope do we have for the "real" issues like hate crimes, employment discrimination and domestic partnerships. Saturday is the gay pride parade here in Houston and the results of this case will set the tone for that event. It will either be a victory celebration, a depressing defeat or perhaps even an all-out riot in the streets.
Morning Outlaw I've been watching the news myself about this. Friends here in New York seem to have a more positive outlook about the results! Let's hope for the best!
Sodomy Laws. . . - WE DON'T HATE GAYS . . BUT WE HATE WHAT YOU DO laws. consenting Adult. . . do whatever as long as u not hurting any one Hell . . . .I think tongue Splitting should be curtailed. .. but as long as I'm not forced to do . . . carry on Rocket River
I agree. I hope the Supreme Court nixes the Texas law. If they do not, I believe Saturday's parade will become a riot, and even though I'm straight, I might just go down there and riot along with them. Not sh*tcanning this law would prove to me that the Supreme Court is out of touch with reality.
Naw, I think those chances are pretty slim! However, I do feel the anti-sodomy law is antiquated and needs to go. If the Supreme Court fails to do so, then the parade should turn into a riot, and I just might join 'em. It's unjust and insulting to the gay community.
no...not in Texas...not in most states that still have sodomy laws. i'm thinking we should know by noon today...i'm with you, outlaw. though it hasn't kept me up at night, i hope that the supreme court strikes down this law.
Max, in your opinion, why is this a federal issue? The Constitution clearly states that these issues should be decided by the States.
excellent point...fair point, too! the question, for me, is whether or not the state has a compelling interest. i don't see one. so i'm much more likely to protect privacy and the consent of adults in this situation in their own bedrooms than i am to invoke the 10th amendment. yes, i believe that criminal law should be left largely to the states...but here we're talking about the very definition of what is criminal...i think that carries it up. but you're right...bowers v. hardwick was the big case i remember from law school on this...in that case the court found the states had an interest in protecting morality, etc...and found that the law in Georgia could stand. the texas legislature should have solved this problem a long time ago. they should have axed the law years ago.
QUESTION: Are Anti-Sodomy laws. .. more Religious Based Laws There are several what I consider Religious based laws that I feel should be scrapped. . . or at least made to be more open to alternative religious [i.e. the bigomy laws. . I'm no bigamist but if someone is. . .why not let them go . . . BUT Judao Christian religion is ANTI-Bigamy, Poligamy, Etc.] Rocket River
Would bigamy/polygamy also have tax implications that would allow people to take advantage of the tax system? I don't really know.
From the NYT NEWS ALERT Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Law Banning Sodomy (10:09 AM ET) details to follow TIME TO PARTE!!!!
thanks for spoiling it mcmark! just woke up and read your post before I checked the news (did not think it would be announced this early - i always forget the one hour time difference) CNN says it was 6-3!!! Thank you O'Connor and Kennedy!!! Woo-Hoo!!! Should I change my user name now?
WASHINGTON (CNN) – The Supreme Court Thursday struck down a Texas law that criminalizes homosexual sodomy, a ruling considered to be a major victory for gay rights in the United States. The justices voted 6-3 in striking down the Texas law, saying it violated due process guarantees. The case was seen as testing the constitutionality of anti-sodomy laws in 13 states. The justices reviewed the prosecution of two men under a 28-year-old Texas law making it a crime to engage in same-sex intercourse.
Let the party begin. My faith in the US Supreme Court has been somewhat restored...at least until the 2004 Presidential Election!
This is a case for the Supreme Court because a state law has interfered with people's right to be secure in their persons and their homes, free from unreasonable searches and seizures, and free to pursue happiness in their own way. States do not have the ability to curtail rights granted under the US constitution.
I agree with your post, but it is too bad that the Supreme Court has to clear up issues for the State of Texas. I can't imagine that even 25% of Texans care what goes on in the bedroom between consenting adults.
From CNN: Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented. "The court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda," Scalia wrote for the three, according to the AP. He took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench. "The court has taken sides in the culture war," Scalia said, adding that he has "nothing against homosexuals." Way to throw in the obligatory "Not that there's anything wrong with that...". I wonder if he put his hands up like Jerry did.
