Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS strikes down Texas sodomy ban
FOXnews

Posted on 06/26/2003 7:08:23 AM PDT by Thane_Banquo

SCOTUS sided with the perverts.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 0amanreapswhathesews; 0bedroomkgb; 0godwillnotbemocked; 1aslimmeyslope; 1scrotus; 1slimmeyslope; 3branchesofgovt; activistcourt; activistsupremecourt; ageofconsentlaws; aides; aidesincreasetaxesup; aidesintheusa; aidesupinsuranceup; aidsalert; antibiblecountry; antichristiantrolls; antirelgiontrolls; antireligion; antireligionbigots; antireligiontroll; aregayapparel; arroganceofscotus; ascrotus; assthumpingidiots; biblethumpingmorons; biggovernmentcorrupt; bluenose; blueoyster; bohica; bowtothesecularstate; bowtothewelfarestate; bugger; buggered; buggerer; buggery; busybodieslose; buttpirate; buyvaselinestock; catsdogsmice; celebratesin; chickenlollipoppers; christianbashing; civilrights; clintonlegacy; constitutiontrashed; crazyfundies; culturewar; davidsouterisafaggot; deathoftheusa; deathofthewest; degeneracy; depravity; destructionofusa; devianceuptaxesup; deviantsex; donwenow; downourthroats; downwenoware; druglaws; endofcivilization; evilinactivistcourts; evilinrighttoprivacy; falalafalalalalala; falalalalalalalala; farkinqueers; fecalcontact; fools; fudgepackersdelight; fundiesinthecloset; fundyhysteria; gay; gayagenda; gayarrogance; gaybashing; gaycheese; gaycivlrights; gaydar; gaygestapo; gaykeywords; gaymafia; gaymarriage; gaymoose; gaynarcissist; gaypride; gayrights; gaysarevictimtoo; gayscelebrate; gaysholdusacaptive; gaysoutofcloset; gaysremakeamerica; gayssuppressthetruth; gaystapo; gaytrolldolls; gaytyrants; gayvote; getoutofmyroom; goawaymrsgrundy; godless; godsjudgement; godswrath; governmentschoolsex; hatecrimelegislation; himom; hitlerywins; homeschoolnow; homoapologists; homophobes; homosexual; homosexualagenda; homosexualagendawins; homosexualvote; hyperventilating; ihavearighttosin; ihaverights; incestlaws; indoctrination; itsjustsex; itsunatural; jeebuslovesgays; keywordwarsaregay; kitcheneducation; kneepadbrigade; lawrencevtexas; legislatinghate; legislatingsin; legislaturemakeslaws; lewinksys4all; lewinsky; lewinskys; liars; liberalagenda; libertariansareevil; libertines; lotsdaughters; lpcausesbo; makejeebuscry; manboylove; manboyloveassoc; manholeinspectorjoy; menwithmen; moralrelativism; moralrelativistinusa; msgrundypatrol; mycousinknowsclay; nambla; namblawillwinnext; onepercentrulesusa; oralsex; ourgayapparel; paulwellstone; pcdecision; pederasty; peepingtomgovt; perversion; perverts; preverts; prisoners; privacyprotection; prostitutionlaws; publichealthhazard; puritanslose; readtheconstitution; relgionbashing; religionbashing; romans1godswrath; rosieishappytoday; rosietypes; rumprangers; samesexdisorder; samesexmarriage; samesexmarriages; scotusknowsbest; scotusmakeslaw; scotustrumpsgodslaw; scotustrumpstate; scotustyranny; scrotus; sexeducation; sexindoctrination; sexpolice; sin; singlorified; slimmeyslope; slipperyslop; slipperyslope; slouching; slurpslurp; snitchonyourneighbor; sodomandgomorrah; sodomites; sodommites; sodomy; sodomylaw; sodomylaws; spyinthebushes; statesrights; stronginthesouth; supremecourt; swalloworspit; talibanintheusa; talibannedtrolls; texassodomylaw; thefunpolice; thegayelite; thegayvote; thisisevil; tisseasontobeunhappy; tistheseason; tobejolly; usathirdworldcountry; vicesnowvirtues; victimlesscrime; victimsofaids; victimsofhepatitus; weakinthehead; whatstatesright; womenwithwomen; zscrotus; zslimmeyslope; zzgoodruling
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 501-550551-600601-650 ... 1,701-1,734 next last
To: The Red Zone; Liberal Classic
There are three kinds of flamewar threads that get this way. The War Between the States, The War on (some) Drugs, and Microsoft versus Linux.

No, four. Creation vs. evolution.

Five. Don't forget Atkins diet vs Low Fat diet threads.

551 posted on 06/26/2003 9:52:20 AM PDT by Sam Cree (Democrats are herd animals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 540 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
Also, strangely enough, it seems that most Atkins Diet threads turn into flame wars.

Yeah, cause folks who have had great success with Atkins are incredulous that others either don't, or they have had success with other diets. Seems all those ketones go to their brain.

552 posted on 06/26/2003 9:52:23 AM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 546 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
Yep I did forget about creation versus evolution threads. How could I? :)
553 posted on 06/26/2003 9:52:35 AM PDT by Liberal Classic (Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 546 | View Replies]

To: BlackjackHF
If they are against the government legislating morality, they are against the government banning pedophilia. You cannot escape that.

If you are in favor of this ruling you are in favor of pedophilia because you are saying that the government has no right to ban it.

This is crap. What part of the phrase "consenting adults" don't you understand?

Pedophilia is illegal,as it should be, because children cannot make an informed consent.

This ruling has nothing to do with under-age children, but instead deals with the PRIVATE behavior of consenting ADULTS.

You sound like a bad broken record, and your statement here is bogus.

LQ

554 posted on 06/26/2003 9:53:05 AM PDT by LizardQueen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
A right exists regardless of whether, or not, it can be guaranteed by the govm't. Govm'ts role is to protect rights, but there can be no guarantees.
555 posted on 06/26/2003 9:53:14 AM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 539 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
People get so jacked up about it because they are worried that someone, somewhere, is having a better time than they are.
556 posted on 06/26/2003 9:53:19 AM PDT by LanPB01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 504 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone
Still no answer?

I thought you were better than this.

557 posted on 06/26/2003 9:53:42 AM PDT by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: Sam Cree
Five. Don't forget Atkins diet vs Low Fat diet threads.

I haven't seen any of these yet, but since my wife bought his book recently I might have to check on out.

A new category is about Staffordshire Terriers, aka Pit Bulls that seems to be gaining popularity.

558 posted on 06/26/2003 9:53:47 AM PDT by Liberal Classic (Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies]

To: Those_Crazy_Liberals
Could we just get Kennedy to recuse himself from those cases?
559 posted on 06/26/2003 9:53:54 AM PDT by steveegg (Close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, air-burst artillery and thermonuclear weapons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
(eyes narrow) Say..... you aren't one of them rapist child molesters, are ya?

What about child-molester rapists, like in prison? How do we feel about them? I'm so conflicted!

560 posted on 06/26/2003 9:54:07 AM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 492 | View Replies]

Comment #561 Removed by Moderator

To: OWK
I thought you were better than this.

Hittin' #5 with consistency.

562 posted on 06/26/2003 9:54:50 AM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 557 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Are they the reason the leaves on my habanero pepper plant are curling up at the edges too? Is there a spray for that?
563 posted on 06/26/2003 9:55:07 AM PDT by Treebeard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies]

To: BlackjackHF
Yes, otherwise it'd be mob rule.

Ahh. Finally I’m starting to get through and educate you. This should have been done for you sometime in grammar school.

Anyone who believes this is about the right to privacy also has to believe that abortion is about the right to privacy.

I don’t want to tax your brain too much on a day when we’ve made so much progress, but the difference between the two issues should be too obvious to miss. In fact, only an absolute moron, or a liberal, could fail to see it.

When a man buggers another man who agrees to be buggered, and they do it in the privacy of their own home, there is no victim. It is a rather disgusting act, if you ask me, but that’s their business.

When a doctor sucks a fetus from a woman’s womb, the victim can be found in the garbage can next to the operating table. One day, hopefully, the Supreme Court will recognize this undeniable fact.

564 posted on 06/26/2003 9:55:08 AM PDT by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 489 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone
I should have pinged you to post 539 as well.
565 posted on 06/26/2003 9:55:26 AM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 539 | View Replies]

To: steveegg
"Could we just get Kennedy to recuse himself from those cases?"

I would support that. He's never going to ride the sodomy card into the CJ's chair.
566 posted on 06/26/2003 9:55:30 AM PDT by Those_Crazy_Liberals (Ronaldus Magnus he's our man . . . If he can't do it, no one can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 559 | View Replies]

To: spunkets; Teacher317
A right exists regardless of whether, or not, it can be guaranteed by the govm't. Govm'ts role is to protect rights, but there can be no guarantees.

An important distinction.

But I was hoping to address the more fundamental question.

What ARE rights?

How do we know what we SHOULD consider a right, and what we should not?

567 posted on 06/26/2003 9:55:41 AM PDT by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 555 | View Replies]

To: dead
when the unwashed masses want to take your guns away, don’t go crying about your rights.

The right to keep and bear arms is a Constitutional right, unlike "privacy rights" or various other "rights" that have been more or less "judicially legislated" under the guise of protecting "life, liberty" etc...

The point is, if it's not a guaranteed specific "right", then it's under the law, and the judiciary is not supposed to be making laws.

568 posted on 06/26/2003 9:55:53 AM PDT by 88keys (proudly posting without reading all the other posts first!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 425 | View Replies]

To: LanPB01
This thread is just getting silly now. Blackjack's taking it into stupidland with all the pedo talk.
569 posted on 06/26/2003 9:56:22 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine (...road trip.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 556 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Yes, but your refrigerator didn't fart when you took meat out of it. That's more the topic of this thread. ;)
570 posted on 06/26/2003 9:56:22 AM PDT by Treebeard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: BlackjackHF
You must practice hours a day just to be that daft. Kennedy expressly addressed that this only has bearing on adult behavior, not on minors, not pedophilia. Get a grip.
571 posted on 06/26/2003 9:56:41 AM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 526 | View Replies]

To: okchemyst
Are they the reason the leaves on my habanero pepper plant are curling up at the edges too? Is there a spray for that?

No, but Libertarians do cause late blight on tomato plants. Try mulching heavily, it makes it harder for them to get to the plants.

LQ

572 posted on 06/26/2003 9:56:57 AM PDT by LizardQueen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 563 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone
Winning a flame war on the internet is like winning a medal at the Special Olympics....... Sure it's cool, but you're still a retard :-)
573 posted on 06/26/2003 9:57:50 AM PDT by MJY1288 (The Gifted One is Clueless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 525 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone
I tend to think the SCOUS was right for the wrong reasons.
574 posted on 06/26/2003 9:58:21 AM PDT by Liberal Classic (Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317; HumanaeVitae; dead; yall
HumanaeVitae
The 'individual rights' that are listed in the Bill of Rights were voted on at one time, dead. They can be changed by...voting. If you believe that 'individual rights' are whatever you believe them to be, then that's another discussion entirely. The thing that gives us 'individual rights' was voted on at one time.
-402-


The Bill of Rights and the Federalist Papers explicitly state that the enumeration of Rights in the Constitution by no means limits the number of Rights we have. Also, they cannot be changed by "voting". They can only be changed by a Constitutional Convention (and the next one of those is going to be a terrifying event. The Left no longer cares about propriety, and will go after everything).
417 -T317-


In Marbary V Madison [1803],
Justice Marshall says that the 'fundamentals' of our constitution cannot be changed without, in effect, voiding the contract.
Fundamental rights [such as the RKBA's, or the right to live a private life] can NOT be changed by...voting.
575 posted on 06/26/2003 9:58:23 AM PDT by tpaine (Really, I'm trying to be a 'decent human being', but me flesh is weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies]

To: BlackjackHF
"Yes there is, you just want to ignore it because it destroys your idiotic arguments."

Its you who has no argument. Why else would you keep using strawmen that were explicitly addressed in the decision?
576 posted on 06/26/2003 9:58:35 AM PDT by toothless (I AM A MAN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 561 | View Replies]

To: tdadams
Grow up and read the decision.

Oh my! Such lofty expectations you have from the knuckle draggers.

577 posted on 06/26/2003 9:59:06 AM PDT by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 515 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
This thread has once again proved the fact that people whose legal knowledge comes from "Matlock" and "The Practice" should leave law to the lawyers. Sure, everyone should read the constitution and know some basic facts about how government works. However, they should also realize their limitations.
578 posted on 06/26/2003 9:59:15 AM PDT by LanPB01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 569 | View Replies]

To: bk1000
Sooner or later someone will insist it is their fundamental right to engauge in behavior YOU find abhorant.

If their behavior isn't infringing on my Rights, then why the hell should I care what they do? If they are committing force, fraud, or theft against me... then they will have to answer to my personal protection equipement first. If they survive that, then I will go before the courts to have them prosecuted.

Getting the government to pass a law against nose picking is NOT the way this country is set up to run.

579 posted on 06/26/2003 9:59:29 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 543 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Thank you for that momentary lapse into the refuge of reason.
580 posted on 06/26/2003 9:59:54 AM PDT by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 575 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
I bet you're one of those "people" who want to repeal the odd-even day parking laws, aren't you? Admit it, you latent cannibalistic serial killer!
581 posted on 06/26/2003 10:00:03 AM PDT by IowaHawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 569 | View Replies]

To: BlackjackHF
The SC just did. Maybe you haven’t been reading this thread?

avoid reality at all costs, blackjack.

582 posted on 06/26/2003 10:00:48 AM PDT by jethropalerobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 501 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
A right exists regardless of whether, or not, it can be guaranteed by the govm't. Govm'ts role is to protect rights, but there can be no guarantees.

I guess what I mean is that the government could possibly (and should) guarantee/protect them. For Rights like "freedom to have a soul", the government could never address problem. I was leaning more towards the physically "doable" end of things, because of the many etheral rights that the Left would assert as "real" if it weren't stated... like the Right to good Karma, the Right to high self-esteem, the Right to be free from ever being inconvenienced, etc.

583 posted on 06/26/2003 10:01:14 AM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 555 | View Replies]

To: CholeraJoe
SCOTUS supports right to Privacy.

It went without saying that the Court would strike down this particular Texas law, which allowed "sodomy" for some people but not for others. What was unexpected, and most gratifying, was that the decision goes much further and establishes a general right of privacy.

This is a black day for busybodies nationwide. Three cheers!

584 posted on 06/26/2003 10:02:14 AM PDT by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
ROFLMBO!!!

*applause!*

585 posted on 06/26/2003 10:02:19 AM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 573 | View Replies]

To: BlackjackHF
“Pedophilia is never consensual because children cannot consent to sex.”

Why not? I’m sure if you call up NAMBLA they’ll give you the names of several kids who want to have sex with older men. Well then, you religious zealot, how dare you impose your morality on them!

I could care less what NAMBLA says, the fact of the matter is that the law in every state that I am aware of requires a person to be an adult in order to consent to sex.

The premise of your argument--that children can consent to sex with adults--is totally false. Yet you unsuprisingly and blithely ignore the unalterable fact that sex with a child is not comparable to consent sex between two mentally competent adults.

In sum, your hysterical claims are totally unpersuasive.

Trace

586 posted on 06/26/2003 10:02:33 AM PDT by Trace21230 (Ideal MOAB test site: Paris)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 561 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Getting the government to pass a law against nose picking is NOT the way this country is set up to run.

Should the SCOTUS void a states anti-nose picking law, hypothetically? Or do states have the right to pass silly laws?

587 posted on 06/26/2003 10:02:56 AM PDT by NeoCaveman (Ohio Chapter. Original White Devil for Sharpton!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 579 | View Replies]

To: puroresu
Laws which keep homosexuality in the closet do, technically, restrict the liberty of the few people wishing to engage in that disgusting behavior. But they enhance the overall liberty of society. Because uncloseted homosexuality goes on a rampage against the liberty of the general populace.

Spare us the usual socialist fallacies. What two consenting adults do in their home does not affect you in any way. Whatever nebulous concern you have about its societal impact is a product of your own neuroses. That is no basis for creating law that abridges another's rights. Your squeemishness about the matter does not take precedence over their right to live in a matter that you may not approve of.

588 posted on 06/26/2003 10:03:09 AM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 537 | View Replies]

To: BlackjackHF
“Pedophilia is never consensual because children cannot consent to sex.”

Minors cannot consent, nor can they sign contracts. Nor are they held entirely responsible for their actions- because they are a protected class of citizen.
589 posted on 06/26/2003 10:04:05 AM PDT by ffusco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 561 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona
This is a black day for busybodies nationwide. Three cheers!

Judging from some of the outrageous and narrow-minded comments on this thread, I am inclined to agree with you.

590 posted on 06/26/2003 10:04:13 AM PDT by CholeraJoe (White Devils for Sharpton. We're bad. We're Nationwide)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 584 | View Replies]

To: toothless; BlackjackHF
Its you who has no argument. Why else would you keep using strawmen that were explicitly addressed in the decision?

Thanks. I think it's evident to any objective observer that his tired arguments are completely devoid of any utility.

Trace

591 posted on 06/26/2003 10:04:21 AM PDT by Trace21230 (Ideal MOAB test site: Paris)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 576 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
ROFLMAO - would steal it for a tagline, but it is too long.
592 posted on 06/26/2003 10:04:44 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine (Winning flame wars on the net is like winning a medal at the Special Olympics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 573 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
SCALIA, J., dissenting:

I do not know what "acting in private" means; surely consensual sodomy, like heterosexual intercourse, is rarely performed on stage.

LOL

593 posted on 06/26/2003 10:05:01 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 520 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
I was leaning more towards the physically "doable" end of things, because of the many etheral rights that the Left would assert as "real" if it weren't stated... like the Right to good Karma, the Right to high self-esteem, the Right to be free from ever being inconvenienced, etc.

I am of the opinion that rights are for the most part intangible things, things the government shouldn't be doing to us such as the right to privacy and a right to worship, while the left believes in the right to tangible things such as the right to free housing and the right to free healthcare.

594 posted on 06/26/2003 10:05:07 AM PDT by Liberal Classic (Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 583 | View Replies]

To: Aeronaut
Deeper into the cesspool we slide.

Hey! I use chlorine in my hot tub.

595 posted on 06/26/2003 10:05:44 AM PDT by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: JudgemAll
This law in effect, sir, allows women who are sodomized by their husbands to not appeal for a divorce. This is a defacto legalization of abuse.

No, it does not, because in this case you are talking about rape. This law does not address itself to rape.

596 posted on 06/26/2003 10:05:45 AM PDT by huck von finn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
Such a discussion needs to distinguish contingent political rights from absolute moral rights. Many acts which a political system ought to permit, are still morally wrong. I have no absolute moral right to lie about anything, even something so trivial as what I had for lunch. But I can, and should, have a political right to do so.
597 posted on 06/26/2003 10:05:52 AM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 565 | View Replies]

To: CholeraJoe
Judging from some of the outrageous and narrow-minded comments on this thread, I am inclined to agree with you.

Actually, this isn't nearly as bad as I expected it to be.

The usual bedroom police are noticeably absent from this thread today. Perhaps the depression that comes with knowing you are wrong has finally set in.

Trace

598 posted on 06/26/2003 10:05:57 AM PDT by Trace21230 (Ideal MOAB test site: Paris)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 590 | View Replies]

To: tdadams
But since we're not a democracy, this ruling correctly protects the rights of a minority from the tyranny of the majority (read: mob).

Name for me one part of the Constitution that was not voted on.

599 posted on 06/26/2003 10:06:38 AM PDT by HumanaeVitae (Catholic Epimethean)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]

To: tdadams
hold sway over anything other than adult (

A consenting adult is 16. My daughter is 17. Can I have sex with her ?

600 posted on 06/26/2003 10:06:40 AM PDT by VRWC_minion (Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 501-550551-600601-650 ... 1,701-1,734 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson