SCOTUS strikes down Texas sodomy ban

FOXnews

[Thane_Banquo]

SCOTUS sided with the perverts.

[ffusco]

Shhhh! He'll hear you!

[MineralMan]

"That's pretty vile. How about explaining why you want to?"

I asked the same question. What kind of person wants to have sex with his daughter, of any age? I know it happens a lot, but it's obviously wrong. I see few arrests and prosecutions, however, when incest is done between adults. I don't believe a 16 year old is an adult, in any case.

[rwfromkansas]

which is used to support abortion

[I_Love_My_Husband]

I like gossip and knowing who's gay.

Yes my Catholic husband knows.

[MineralMan]

"Why can a person who's one hour shy of their 18th birthday not legally drink, but get plastered starting an hour later? "

In what state is the legal drinking age 18? I know it used to be in Louisiana and New York, but I thought they all changed it to 21.

[bk1000]

They have already found many of the items they had previously described. As for where the rest are, or what happened to them, time will tell. As for whether the adminitration lied about them, I suppose it is possible. But if so, then we were also lied to by Clinton, Gore, virtually every member of Congress, the UN, the French, the Russians, and virtually every serious intelligence agency in the world; all of whom are on the record that he had them.

[VRWC_minion]

That is the issue. Rules are arbitray. Having privacy rights trump arbitrary rules is the danger in this ruling.

[Grando Calrissian]

Regardless of the type of person that wants to have sex with their daughter, is there really any serious consideration being given to overturning the Incest laws in this country?

[MineralMan]

"The Advocate, a homosexual magazine had Souter on the cover saying "Is there a homosexual on the Supreme Court" and offered evidence inside the magazine.
"

Funny...I never read The Advocate. It's a publication with an agenda, and much that is written there is false. I prefer more neutral publications. Using articles in that publication is specious.

[RAT Patrol]

One question: Is morality good or bad?

[spunkets]

" I can claim a 'right' to free association and thus the right not to be affected by their behavior. The 'rights' thing works both ways, chief.

that's correct.

"It's a losing argument.

It's a winning argument. That's what Freedom's about.

[huck von finn]

[bk1000]

"Wrong. They can consent to sex. They are therefore consenting adults as far as sex is concerned. Keep in mind that in 1800's consent was about 12. Why not go back to that ?"

Back then you could probably have been lynched for buggery.
You really wanna go there?

[HumanaeVitae]

Do you really think a single person who wouldn't have had oral or anal sex when it was illegal will change their behavior because of this ruling?

No. But I'm sure you'd agree as a libertarian that people have the right not to associate with people they don't like or of whose behavior they do not approve. Unfortunately, a society is made up of people who share common resources. Court systems, the military, roads and so on. People form societies to do collectively what they cannot do alone. Therefore, aberrant behaviors by small groups of people affect the whole. If someone is a serious heroin addict, and blows through their money and ends up at the door of the county hospital with a severe OD and can't pay for it, the hospital will treat that person and society will have to pick up the tab.

Libertarians are all for secession. What if I want to secede from homosexuals? In other words, I live in society A, and homosexuals live in society B. That way, all of the huge costs related to homosexuality are isolated in society B, and don't touch me in society A.

What about that freeee? Don't I have a right to free association? To not be affected by homosexuals? If homosexuals are going to claim a "right" to engage in their destructive behavior, can't I claim a right to not be affected by it?

Chew on that one, dearie.

[Liberal Classic]

The real danger lies in the arbitrary rules trumping our rights. Our right to keep and bear arms is routinely trumped by BATF regulations, our right to property is routinely trumped by EPA administrative law, and etc. Arbitrary rules make up a government of men, not a government of laws.

[Pahuanui]

Look at the growth curve of government in the late '50s and '60s. It takes off. Match that up with out-of-wedlock birth rates, crime, drug use, STD's and so on.

Stunning. I'm curious, are you familiar with statistics and how to interpret them?

The libertarian party didn't cause that. Moral libertarianism did.

Oh, I see.

So are you claiming that 'moral libertarianism' and 'libertarian social ideas' are the same thing? Is so, please detail exactly how they are equivalent and how 'libertarian social ideas' have were in any way in effect in the 1950s and 60s.

If not, please clarify the differences and why first it was one and now it is the other.

[rwfromkansas]

I hope we get those two retirements and they are liberals or one liberal and O'Connor.

I am disappointed, but I expected this.

So quite frankly, I am having a hard time getting mad about it.

It isn't a vital issue, so I am going to reserve anger for other things even though I am not pleased with this.

[I_Love_My_Husband]

Funny. Since you're pro-homos I'd think it'd be right UP your alley.

You're a libertarian, I'm sure.

Dull.

[kegler4]

"Shhhh! He'll hear you!"

I kinda missed the inanity. But I see he hasn't posted since June 4. Must have moved on.

BTW, somebody on NPR (yes, I know it's liberal, but it's the only radio station with something resembling news in the morning and late afternoon) predicted this outcome Monday. I think she even figured it would be 6-3 or 5-4.

[MineralMan]

"I like gossip and knowing who's gay.
"

Really? And why do you want to know who is supposedly gay? Why is that of interest to you?

Gossip is very often incorrect, and may lead you to draw incorrect conclusions. It's a pretty unseemly thing, and I'm sure the Bible cautions against gossip.