same sex relationships

OUlioness01 · #1 06-26-2003, 12:32 PM

Supreme Court Strikes Down Gay Sex Ban
52 minutes ago

By ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writer

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

The 6-3 ruling reverses course from a ruling 17 years ago that states could punish homosexuals for what such laws historically called deviant sex.

Laws forbidding homosexual sex, once universal, now are rare. Those on the books are rarely enforced but underpin other kinds of discrimination, lawyers for two Texas men had argued to the court.

The men "are entitled to respect for their private lives," Kennedy wrote.

"The state cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime," he said.

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

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia (news - web sites) and Clarence Thomas (news - web sites) dissented.

"The court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda," Scalia wrote for the three. 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."

The two men at the heart of the case, John Geddes Lawrence and Tyron Garner, have retreated from public view. They were each fined $200 and spent a night in jail for the misdemeanor sex charge in 1998.

The case began when a neighbor with a grudge faked a distress call to police, telling them that a man was "going crazy" in Lawrence's apartment. Police went to the apartment, pushed open the door and found the two men having anal sex.

As recently as 1960, every state had an anti-sodomy law. In 37 states, the statutes have been repealed by lawmakers or blocked by state courts.

Of the 13 states with sodomy laws, four — Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma and Missouri — prohibit oral and anal sex between same-sex couples. The other nine ban consensual sodomy for everyone: Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah and Virginia.

Thursday's ruling apparently invalidates those laws as well.

The Supreme Court was widely criticized 17 years ago when it upheld an antisodomy law similar to Texas'. The ruling became a rallying point for gay activists.

Of the nine justices who ruled on the 1986 case, only three remain on the court. Rehnquist was in the majority in that case — Bowers v. Hardwick — as was O'Connor. Stevens dissented.

A long list of legal and medical groups joined gay rights and human rights supporters in backing the Texas men. Many friend-of-the-court briefs argued that times have changed since 1986, and that the court should catch up.

At the time of the court's earlier ruling, 24 states criminalized such behavior. States that have since repealed the laws include Georgia, where the 1986 case arose.

Texas defended its sodomy law as in keeping with the state's interest in protecting marriage and child-rearing. Homosexual sodomy, the state argued in legal papers, "has nothing to do with marriage or conception or parenthood and it is not on a par with these sacred choices."

The state had urged the court to draw a constitutional line "at the threshold of the marital bedroom."

Although Texas itself did not make the argument, some of the state's supporters told the justices in friend-of-the-court filings that invalidating sodomy laws could take the court down the path of allowing same-sex marriage.

The case is Lawrence v. Texas, 02-102.

please don't make this into a flaming war, but what do you all think? I for one think that it was about time this ruling was made. what you do in your own home is a private matter and should not be regualted by law unless it inflicts harm on others.

RACooper · #2 06-26-2003, 12:36 PM

Thank God.....

Maybe this will get all those US right-wing christian fundamentalists out of Toronto. They came up right after same-sex marriage was made legal up here.... so now you bump into them downtown telling everyone that we will all burn in hell for allowing this "abomination against God's laws" to happen (at least it explains the heat).

PS. I like how the majority didn't react to badly when a couple of girls walked by topless though (also legal)

librasoul22 · #3 06-26-2003, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by OUlioness01

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia (news - web sites) and Clarence Thomas (news - web sites) dissented.

These three can kiss my azz, ESPECIALLY Clarence Thomas. I just wanted to say that. That is all.

Munchkin03 · #4 06-26-2003, 12:49 PM

I am glad that the Supreme Court (well, 6 members, anyway) respects the rights of consenting adults to do what they will in the privacy of their own homes. It is up to the individual consenting adults, not the State, to decide which sexual acts are acceptable in their boudoir.

librasoul22, I totally agree with you!

Jill1228 · #5 06-26-2003, 01:09 PM

I agree too! What consenting adults do in their bedroom is nobody's bidness!

Quote:

Originally posted by Munchkin03
I am glad that the Supreme Court (well, 6 members, anyway) respects the rights of consenting adults to do what they will in the privacy of their own homes. It is up to the individual consenting adults, not the State, to decide which sexual acts are acceptable in their boudoir.

librasoul22, I totally agree with you!

KillarneyRose · #6 06-26-2003, 01:20 PM

LibraSoul and I agree on something that is non-fashion related! Inform the press!!!!

AlphaGamDiva · #7 06-26-2003, 01:35 PM

YAY for this....honestly....what ppl do in their bedroom is their own damn biz-nass....i don't want someone tellin me what i can't do (i mean...could you imagine?

), so why should it be any different for gays?? b/c i'm straight i get more privacy?

next thing ya know, they're gonna try to keep ppl from owning handcuffs and blindfolds b/c, hmmm, that's kinda "dangerous" as well.....

*note: not that i personally own handcuffs or blindfolds....jussayin!

KillarneyRose · #8 06-26-2003, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AlphaGamDiva
*note: not that i personally own handcuffs or blindfolds....jussayin!

Yeah, riiiiiiiiiight!

ZTAMiami · #9 06-26-2003, 01:41 PM

Clarence Thomas dissented, hmmmm!!! LOL.

On a related note, I heard that sex toys were ileegal in some states. Anyone know anything about this?

librasoul22 · #10 06-26-2003, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by KillarneyRose
LibraSoul and I agree on something that is non-fashion related! Inform the press!!!!

Yay! lol. *hiding my prarie skirts*

AlphaGamDiva · #11 06-26-2003, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Killarney Rose
Yeah, riiiiiiiiiight!

LMAO.....killarney! SHHHH!

Quote:

Originally posted by ZTAMiami
On a related note, I heard that sex toys were ileegal in some states. Anyone know anything about this?

well, not anywhere around here...lol...in KY we got the hook-up in some sketchy ol' places downtown....and AS SOON as you hit that TN line, there's big ol' XXX billboards everywhere....AL and MS are just as bad....

ok, i am now officially done posting about sex toy stuff.....i know nothing!

LeslieAGD · #12 06-26-2003, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AlphaGamDiva
YAY for this....honestly....what ppl do in their bedroom is their own damn biz-nass....

Yep. They're going to do it anyway...just let 'em be.

OrigamiTulip · #13 06-26-2003, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ZTAMiami
Clarence Thomas dissented, hmmmm!!! LOL.

On a related note, I heard that sex toys were ileegal in some states. Anyone know anything about this?

I think its Alabama where they are illegal...

kstar · #14 06-26-2003, 02:02 PM

Tell me about it.

This decision over throws a law in my state. There are already people calling and stroming the Capitol trying to find a way to reverse it.

Damn bassackwards Oklahomans.

*Note, as an Oklahoman, I have nothing against other Oklahomans, just the racist prejudice, ignorant hicks in the state, I'm sure every state has them, but, egads, they seem to be crawling out of the woodwork here.

LXAAlum · #15 06-26-2003, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AlphaGamDiva
LMAO.....killarney! SHHHH!

ok, i am now officially done posting about sex toy stuff.....i know nothing!

Yeah, right - you're from Kentucky - home to that famous jelly...c'mon now!