"The case for homosexual sodomy is not weak under the Court’s reading of the Constitution — it is extraordinarily strong. Hence the argument is very powerful, on logical grounds, for an expansive interpretation of its meaning and scope, which lends support to Muth’s view that the right should encompass consensual adult incest as well."
Let the black-robed vultures squirm their way out of this one.
So what if said siblings were only engaging in sodomy, would that then be protected?