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

To: Thane_Banquo
Invoked the right to privacy under the 14th amendment.

There are no reservations, so Steve Cintani on FOXNEWS speculates that all sodomy laws in the 13 states that have them will also be overturned.

5 posted on 06/26/2003 7:11:02 AM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: sinkspur
Did they find a way for laws against incest to not be subject to the right to privacy ?
8 posted on 06/26/2003 7:12:23 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 5 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
There is no right to privacy in the 14th amendment. It was invented by leftists to protect certain immoral behaviors, like abortion, and will eventually be used by the left to support overturning laws against child molestation and pornography.
14 posted on 06/26/2003 7:13:33 AM PDT by Thane_Banquo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
so Steve Cintani on FOXNEWS speculates that all sodomy laws in the 13 states that have them will also be overturned.

Two words: Rita Cosby.

Of the thirteen states, only three or four (I believe) have anti-sodomy laws written narrowly, as the Texas law was. The others are more broad, and may not be affected - depending on just what the Supremes said in their ruling.

15 posted on 06/26/2003 7:13:36 AM PDT by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
"Invoked the right to privacy under the 14th amendment. "

So, can I smoke pot in the privacy of my home?

Can I molest my children?

Can I make bombs?

Where will the line be drawn now?

16 posted on 06/26/2003 7:13:48 AM PDT by realpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
Invoked the right to privacy under the 14th amendment.

This is bizarro as hell, pardon my french. I could have expected it to have been overturned on equal protection grounds (i.e. because TX didn't forbid male to female anal sex acts on equal terms) but "privacy"?

28 posted on 06/26/2003 7:16:39 AM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
Griswold continues to haunt.
30 posted on 06/26/2003 7:17:13 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
Didn't the court earlier this week effectively say that the fouteenth amendment didn't exist. What are these people smoking?
222 posted on 06/26/2003 8:12:25 AM PDT by fifteendogs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
Credit where it's due: YOU WERE CORRECT.

The Supremes are wrong.
298 posted on 06/26/2003 8:34:47 AM PDT by ninenot (Joe McCarthy was RIGHT, but Drank Too Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
And the Court's left wing legislated into existence a new "liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions..."

Fascinating.

714 posted on 06/26/2003 10:38:42 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

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