SODOMY BAN UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Quick! Name the three dissenting justices.
Of course, if they were really conservative, they should have been part of the majority . . . you know, not wanting the government to interfere with privacy rights and all . . . but do you really expect consistency from justices who used the 14th Amendment to disenfranchise the very people for whom the amendment was created, two and a half years ago?
And of course, we can't wait to see Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson predict the onset of more terrorism, with the court rulings further eroding "God's veil of protection".
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court struck down a ban on gay sex Thursday, ruling that the law was an unconstitutional violation of privacy.Ok, everybody, it's time to play "Duh: The Home-Game"...
The 6-3 ruling reverses course from a ruling 17 years ago that states could punish homosexuals for what such laws historically called deviant sex.
Laws forbidding homosexual sex, once universal, now are rare. Those on the books are rarely enforced but underpin other kinds of discrimination, lawyers for two Texas men had argued to the court. (full story)
Quick! Name the three dissenting justices.
Of course, if they were really conservative, they should have been part of the majority . . . you know, not wanting the government to interfere with privacy rights and all . . . but do you really expect consistency from justices who used the 14th Amendment to disenfranchise the very people for whom the amendment was created, two and a half years ago?
And of course, we can't wait to see Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson predict the onset of more terrorism, with the court rulings further eroding "God's veil of protection".
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home