[Tina Johnson]

You can join the Brian S. Wise Mailing List by sending an e-mail to: indissent@attbi.com

You're the first to get all In Dissent columns, it's free, and your address is never given or sold to a third party.

[Abcdefg]

I think the sodomy law should be upheld. This isn't about consensual adult sex in private bedrooms. This will legalize sex in public places, like parks that kids could go to "once upon a time".

[AZLiberty]

This is a state's rights issue. There's nothing in the U.S. constitution that delineates a right to sodomy, hence it's up to the states. Given that there are 37 states which permit it, there's still plenty of opportunity.

Of course, this is equally true of the abortion issue, which the Supreme Court decided on its own.

[Illbay]

Sorry, he's wrong about state and local authority being just as hamstrung as the Federal is. This is a newfangled notion that has never been heard before this generation, likely a reaction to too much government at all levels.

Laws against sodomy and other acts public and private have been on the books since before there WAS an American Republic. No one can sincerely claim that the COnstitution, when it was written, struck all those laws down but we're just now getting around to realizing it.

That's just poppy-cock.

The state and local authorities, being nearer to the people, have powers the Federal could not and should not ever dream of.

Morality, public and private, has always been a matter of legislation at that level, and you can't just wave that away because of some hyper-libertarian fad.

[BOOTSTICK]

As far as the argument concerning Lawrence v. Texas, we get the usual Libertarian drivil about how the government should stay out of the bedroom. The failure of this argument is that those persons that engage in these high risk sodomy acts, often get S.T.D. { namely AIDS}and then go-a-begging to the government for money { my hard earned tax dollars} to pay for their medications. The people have the right to outlaw degenerate behavior, to stem the S.T.D.'s that arise from such behavior.

[Lancey Howard]

So the Right should know, in this matter, even if the Court rules on the side of logic, there will always, always, be race-based preferences on the college campus, some preferences just stated more loudly than others.

Is this writer trying to say that athletes are recruited on the basis of their race rather than on their merit ie., athletic ability? If so, I think this writer needs to get a grip.

[Misterioso]

As is so often the case, it falls to conservatives to sort out which sexual activity deserves to be outlawed in our country. One can only wonder why something so private and personal has become the focus of those professing the value of freedom from the coercive state. Scratch a "conservative" and, too often, you find an authoritarian with a hang-up on sex who is unable to separate his personal problems from any rational view of individual rights. How continually tiresome.

[supercat]

My personal feeling is that any sodomy laws etc. should have an exception in case the activity was conducted in a manner which could only be discovered by either (1) someone violating another major law, such as breaking and entering, or (2) some unforeseeable occurrence; even without such language, IMHO, a jury should still act as though such language exists.

Had the defendants' door been locked and the police broken in, I would have no trouble finding unambiguously for the defendants. While it is certainly possible for the police to break into a house based upon false information, I would not regard such a thing as "foreseeable". Since the door was unlocked, however, I find things a bit more murky.

Consider, for example, that people who are visiting others and are expected will often open the door and announce themselves or in some cases just enter outright. Every once in awhile, someone doing so may manage to open the wrong door. Generally they will then close it again as soon as they realize their mistake (apologizing if noticed), but they would first see whatever was visible from the door. Such mistakes are perhaps unfortunate, but they are hardly unforeseeable.

This in this particular case I'd probably base my decision upon the layout of the house and the men's position within it. If the living room was away from the entrance such that the cop had to enter the dwelling to observe the two men, I would certainly vote to acquit. Otherwise, depending upon the facts of the case, I might not.

[mhking]

Black conservative ping

If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)

Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.

[csvset]

Tyron Garner, right, and John Lawrence, left, listen to their lawyer, Suzanne Goldberg, center, speak to reporters after a Harris County Criminal Court judge found them guilty and fined them for homosexual conduct on Dec. 22, 1998, in Houston. The Supreme Court said Monday, Dec.2, 2002, it would consider whether states can punish homosexuals for having sex, a case that tests the constitutionality of sodomy laws in 13 states. The justices will review the prosecution of these two men under a state law making it a crime to engage in same-sex intercourse. The two men, arrested for having sex in a private home, appealed their conviction under Texas' sodomy law. (AP Photo/Michael Stravato,file)

[Straight Vermonter]

Ronald Reagan’s long held wish to get government off of the people’s backs

It wasn't the government who was on that guy's back. LOL

[rwfromkansas]

Sodomy laws should be upheld. It is not a conservative trait to get rid of them, but a libertarian.

[hattend]

...will determine the validity of anti-sodomy laws in 13 States, concerning the 1998 arrests of John Geddes Lawrence and Tyron Garner, who were caught in Lawrence’s apartment engaging in acts of sodomy. (The two eventually plead no contest and paid $200 fines.)

How does one get "caught" in one's apartment? Were they actually "in the apartment" or out on the patio/deck/balcony? Or was the "catcher" a loud screamer and they were disturbing the peace?

Just for my own morbid curiosity I want details. LOL!!