The law concerns an action, not the person taking the action. No matter who the person is who participates in the homosexual behavior, that person is treated the same as any other person taking the same action.
The same is true of any of a number of murder laws. There are people who, because of various factors involving their tendencies and their upbringing, would never murder anyone. That doesn't means the law treats murderers unequally from the non-murderers.
INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE Amici are medical organizations that believe public health policy should be based upon scientific evidence rather than political expediency. They believe that the medical research clearly demonstrates the harmful nature of same-sex sodomy, and that compassionate, caring physicians should discourage such harmful behavior. Amici submit this brief to inform the Court of the public health concerns associated with same-sex sodomy. 1
The Texas Physicians Resource Council is a statewide network of Christian physicians and dentists made up of approximately 500 members. Its purpose is to address medically related ethical issues that affect Texas families, including issues relating to homosexuality. The Christian Medical and Dental Associations (" CMDA") are national organizations made up of the Christian Medical Association and the Christian Dental Association, with over 17,000 members. CMDA promotes evidence-based medicine and addresses policies on healthcare issues. Many CMDA members are involved in treating sexually transmitted diseases worldwide through medical missions to third world countries. The Catholic Medical Association upholds principles of the Catholic faith and morality as related to the science and practice of medicine, and applies principles of faith and morality to modern medical science and practice.
Texas has a legitimate interest in regulating public health, and the CDC has identified sexually transmitted diseases (" STDs") as a public health problem. Sodomy is an efficient method of transmitting STDs. And regardless of the reason, same-sex sodomy is far more effective in spreading STDs than opposite-sex sodomy. Multiple studies have estimated that 40 percent or more of men who practice anal sex acquire STDs. In fact, same-sex sodomy has resulted in the transformation of diseases previously transmitted only through fecally contamin-ated food and water into sexually caused diseases– primarily among those who practice same-sex sodomy. The issue under rational-basis review is not whether Texas should be concerned about opposite-sex sodomy, but whether it is reasonable to believe that same-sex sodomy is a distinct public health problem.
The Georgia sodomy law, underlying Bowers, has been thrown out since 1986 by the Georgia Supreme Court as "unconstitutional."
Don't know what that means to this case, but the fact that Texas specifically exempted heterosexuals may be why the SC took this case.
Only if you include sexual orientation under the 14th amendment. Currently, the court has not read it into there. And it should not.
Yet.
It's called "precedent." The next case before the court will be decided based on this one. If they use logic, they could use Lawrence, depending on how it is decided, to strike down laws against everything from private drug use to bestiality.
This is what Sink and many others have not grasped here yet: If the Supreme Court makes a constitutional ruling striking a law, it is NOT the same as a repeal of that law. A repeal, in addition to being a democratic process, applies only to THAT PARTICULAR LAW. A SCOTUS ruling, on the other hand, is an ABSOLUTE, UNIVERSAL ruling that will have much broader implications.