Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Sodomy Law - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-26-2003, 11:09 AM   #1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
ouizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: s p o r a t i c
Posts: 3,790
Local Time: 06:38 PM
Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Sodomy Law

'bout time those old fuckers did something right!

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court struck down a Texas ban on gay sex Thursday, ruling that the law was an unconstitutional violation of privacy.

The justices voted 6-3 in striking down the Texas law, saying it violated due process guarantees.

"The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court's majority. "The state cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime."

Gay rights advocates immediately hailed the decision, while religious conservatives condemned it.

"It's an historic day for gay Americans," said Ruth Harlow of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, a gay-rights group representing the two Texas men. "I think Americans will be celebratory about this decision."

The ruling reverses a 1986 high court ruling upholding state anti-sodomy laws. Kennedy wrote that homosexuals have "the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government."

The case stemmed from the 1998 arrest of a gay Houston couple under a 28-year-old Texas law making it a crime to engage in same-sex intercourse. A Texas state appeals court found the law "advances a legitimate state interest, namely, preserving public morals."

Gay rights advocates argued the law legitimized discrimination against homosexuals in everyday life.

"This is a very strong ruling that we all, as individuals -- whether gay or straight -- have the liberty to choose who we'll love and how we'll do that in the privacy of our own homes," Harlow said.

In 1986, the Supreme Court upheld the prosecution of two gay men under a Georgia anti-sodomy law in a 5-4 decision that focused on the right to privacy. In Thursday's ruling, Kennedy said that decision "was not correct when it was decided, and it is not correct today."

"The court is just catching up with American society, which has already recognized gay people's equal liberty, equal humanity," Harlow said. "And the court issued a very powerful decision itself recognizing that humanity."

But the ruling immediately drew fire from a spokesman for a religious conservative group, the National Clergy Council.

"The court has said today that morality -- matters of right and wrong behavior -- do not matter in the law," said the Rev. Rob Shenck, one of the group's founders. "That is an undermining of our concept of justice in this country."

The Texas case already has entered the national political debate, stirred by May comments from Sen. Rick Santorum, a member of the Senate's Republican leadership.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Santorum said if the justices overturned the Texas law, "then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery, you have the right to anything."

Santorum defended his remarks, but some fellow Republicans distanced themselves from them.

The majority opinion appears to cover similar laws in 12 other states and reverses a 1986 high court ruling upholding sodomy laws. Kennedy wrote that homosexuals have "the full right to engage in private conduct without government intervention."

Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer agreed with Kennedy in full. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor agreed with the outcome of the case but not all of Kennedy's rationale.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented.

"The court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda," Scalia wrote for the three, according to the AP. He took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench.

"The court has taken sides in the culture war," Scalia said, adding that he has "nothing against homosexuals."
__________________

ouizy is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 11:16 AM   #2
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 09:38 AM
Pffft. About time.

Out of curiosity, has anyone ever been tried for breaking such a law? I'd hate to imagine how a trial would proceed regarding what any person chooses to do in the bedroom. If I were a gay person I'd jump back and forth from contempt to ludicrous fascination that a court would have any kind of vested interest in persuing that kind of charge.

When I mumble 'who cares' I really mean who cares. Does anyone care about what their neighbours are up to in their bedrooms right now?

I admit, its beyond me.

__________________

__________________
<a href=https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 11:34 AM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
sulawesigirl4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,416
Local Time: 05:38 PM
Very glad to see this. It's a little unbelievable that such laws are still on the books in the US.
__________________
"I can't change the world, but I can change the world in me." - Bono

sulawesigirl4 is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 11:34 AM   #4
Halloweenhead
Forum Moderator
 
Bonochick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cherry Lane
Posts: 40,819
Local Time: 06:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem

When I mumble 'who cares' I really mean who cares. Does anyone care about what their neighbours are up to in their bedrooms right now?

I admit, its beyond me.
I don't want to know ANYTHING about what goes on next door.

*peers over*

*shuts blinds*

__________________
"Knight in shining Zubaz."

Bonochick [at] interference.com
Bonochick is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 12:40 PM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
ouizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: s p o r a t i c
Posts: 3,790
Local Time: 06:38 PM
yes there have been cases - one famous one in Houston (I think.)
ouizy is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 01:13 PM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
HeartlandGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 7,033
Local Time: 03:38 PM
The article I read stated that a "neighbor with a grudge" called the police because a man was "going crazy" next door. Police busted in and found the couple having "illegal sex." They then spent the night in jail and were fined.

I'm glad this has been repealed. The sexual acts of two people who are of age should be private. To paraphrase one of the dissenting justices, the legal system has better things to worry about than this.
HeartlandGirl is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 01:30 PM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 10:38 PM
Glad to hear they came to this decision.
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 01:46 PM   #8
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 02:38 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by HeartlandGirl
The article I read stated that a "neighbor with a grudge" called the police because a man was "going crazy" next door. Police busted in and found the couple having "illegal sex." They then spent the night in jail and were fined.

I'm glad this has been repealed. The sexual acts of two people who are of age should be private. To paraphrase one of the dissenting justices, the legal system has better things to worry about than this.
My neighbors have woken me up at 2am ‘going’ crazy.

I have called the police and they have come out and told the hetero couple to close the window and keep the noise inside.

If 'loud sex' is disturbing the peace, it should be cited on those grounds only.
deep is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 01:51 PM   #9
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 06:38 PM
I hope all the gay couples I know celebrate this by going to Canada to get married...and go to Texas for the honeymoon! Yeehaw!



__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 01:53 PM   #10
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 02:38 PM
Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Sodomy Law

Quote:
Originally posted by ouizy
'bout time those old fuckers did something right!




Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented.

"The court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda," Scalia wrote for the three, according to the AP. He took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench.

"The court has taken sides in the culture war," Scalia said, adding that he has "nothing against homosexuals."
Can a gay or lesbian person get a fair hearing before these Judges?
Are they fit to serve in 2003?
deep is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 02:01 PM   #11
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
HeartlandGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 7,033
Local Time: 03:38 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep


My neighbors have woken me up at 2am ‘going’ crazy.

I have called the police and they have come out and told the hetero couple to close the window and keep the noise inside.

If 'loud sex' is disturbing the peace, it should be cited on those grounds only.
The impression I got from the article was that the neighbor was just looking for a reason to call the cops, whether or not the guys were being loud.

I remember complaining about my neighbors here once, and someone talked about how they were tired of listening to their neighbors having noisy sex, so he wrote a very detailed description of everything he could hear and taped it to their door. Problem solved!
HeartlandGirl is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 02:06 PM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 02:38 PM
I know the police have to have "cause" before entering and the "going crazy" call was their reason.

I gave the example if the boys truly were "too loud".

If the "crazy couple" were straight the police would have just told them about the report and asked them to keep it down, a bit.
deep is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 02:36 PM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
ouizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: s p o r a t i c
Posts: 3,790
Local Time: 06:38 PM
There is nothing wrong with the neighbor calling, it was the grounds on which teh officers arrested the couple that is shameful.


As far as those three justices, all I can say is that Antonin Scalia is no friend of this country. I am ashamed to have people like this sitting on the bench in the highest court of my country.

Truly and utterly ashamed.
ouizy is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 03:14 PM   #14
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:38 PM
The real shame is the fact this law existed in Texas for 28 years.
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 03:42 PM   #15
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
HeartlandGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 7,033
Local Time: 03:38 PM
And not just Texas.

* s from Oklahoma

Yeah, I saw your point, deep. I was just saying that the article I read suggested that the neighbor's call was unjustified. I agree with everyone that it is one thing to punish noisiness, and quite another to punish sexual behavior.
HeartlandGirl is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 03:48 PM   #16
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Just east of Brunoville..
Posts: 50
Local Time: 11:38 PM
Sex is sometimes an expressive and vocal activity between 2 amourous people.

Atticus.
__________________
the hand that leads you
is the hand that
will push you away..
Atticus Finch is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 04:38 PM   #17
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 05:38 PM
I'm surprised, honestly. I guess my cynicism has often gotten the best of me.

I did perfectly guess the three dissenters, though. Proven to be, time and time again, three bigots in black dresses. Rehnquist is expected to retire within this term, and it is also expected that Bush will nominate Scalia in his place. If/when that happens, we should all voice our disapproval and support a justice who is more mainstream. I think Sandra Day O'Connor would be a cool Chief Justice!

Anyhow, a happy day!

Melon
melon is offline  
Old 06-26-2003, 04:58 PM   #18
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 02:38 PM
I think there are 13 states with similar laws.

Melon,

O'Connor wants to retire, too.

Wm. Kennedy would be a pragmatic choice for chief.

W has said Scalia and Thomas are the types of Supremes he likes.
deep is offline  
Old 06-30-2003, 05:00 PM   #19
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 02:38 PM
Trent Lott's views were bigoted?

But, Bll Frist is A-OK.





Quote:



Frist Endorses Idea of Gay Marriage Ban


By William C. Mann
Associated Press Writer

June 30, 2003





CBN.com – WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Senate majority leader said Sunday he supported a proposed constitutional amendment to ban homosexual marriage in the United States.

Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said the Supreme Court's decision last week on gay sex threatens to make the American home a place where criminality is condoned.

The court on Thursday threw out a Texas law that prohibited acts of sodomy between homosexuals in a private home, saying that such a prohibition violates the defendants' privacy rights under the Constitution. The ruling invalidated the Texas law and similar statutes in 12 other states.

"I have this fear that this zone of privacy that we all want protected in our own homes is gradually - or I'm concerned about the potential for it gradually being encroached upon, where criminal activity within the home would in some way be condoned," Frist told ABC's "This Week."

"And I'm thinking of - whether it's prostitution or illegal commercial drug activity in the home - ... to have the courts come in, in this zone of privacy, and begin to define it gives me some concern."

Asked whether he supported an amendment that would ban any marriage in the United States except a union of a man and a woman, Frist said: "I absolutely do, of course I do.

"I very much feel that marriage is a sacrament, and that sacrament should extend and can extend to that legal entity of a union between - what is traditionally in our Western values has been defined - as between a man and a woman. So I would support the amendment."

Same-sex marriages are legal in Belgium and the Netherlands. Canada's Liberal government announced two weeks ago that it would enact similar legislation soon.

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., was the main sponsor of the proposal offered May 21 to amend the Constitution. It was referred to the House Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution on Wednesday, the day before the high court ruled.

As drafted, the proposal says:

"Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any state under state or federal law shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."

To be added to the Constitution, the proposal must be approved by two-thirds of the House and the Senate and ratified by three-fourths of the states.

Frist said Sunday he respects the Supreme Court decision but feels the justices overstepped their bounds.

"Generally, I think matters such as sodomy should be addressed by the state legislatures," Frist said. "That's where those decisions - with the local norms, the local mores - are being able to have their input in reflected.

"And that's where it should be decided, and not in the courts."

deep is offline  
Old 06-30-2003, 06:29 PM   #20
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 06:38 PM
Nice.

I suppose slavery and segregation were also just "local norms," too.
__________________

__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×