Paging Joycelyn Elders.
Posted on 04/14/2016 3:09:33 AM PDT by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies
why is the poster a jerk?
Is the story not true, is it a lie?
Don’t just come on here and call someone a jerk and then not have a reason to name call.
Wow!
Ted Cruz = Isis
There are no limits to the hate at FR for a good conservative
xo you decide what is to be posted based on what you agree with. How about saying if this is false or a lie or true.
Porn breaks up the pong tang monopoly.
Voting for yet another ivy league lawyer who became an elected official who has not even finished his first term is insanity
Paging Joycelyn Elders.
Seriously don-o?
You’re asking me to read a 76 page legal brief on a case that Cruz lost at the State level and again at the US District Appellate Court. His argument failed and you haven’t bothered to look at the basic summary.
At a glance, this statement jumps out from the article. “Cruz’s office argued that the prior ruling would
>>give all manner of deviants grounds to claim that “engaging in consensual adult incest or bigamy” must be legal as they have a right to “enhance their sexual experiences.” <<<
They lost the motion and ultimately chose not to bring the matter to the Supreme Court.Cruz’s office argued that the prior ruling would give all manner of deviants grounds to claim that “engaging in consensual adult incest or bigamy” must be legal as they have a right to “enhance their sexual experiences.” They lost the motion and ultimately chose not to bring the matter to the Supreme Court.
I understand that you revere Ted Cruz, but do you honestly feel that legalizing Texan’s adult play-toys would result in the legalization of incest or bigamy? It’s been well over a decade since toy-ban was overturned, and incest and bigamy have not been legalized in Texas.
I agree that Cruz was doing his job, but you would think he would try & talk his boss out of prosecuting this loser. 78 pages of how
“Americans have no constitutional right to bear dildos, that the government has a legitimate interest in discouraging “autonomous sex,” and that allowing the sale of sex toys is the first step on the road to legal incest.”
This is going way too far to try and legalize the right of the state to interfere in the rights of the people. I don’t get where he thinks it is the right of the state to tell us what to do as long as consenting adult or adults are involved and no one who does not wish to partake is involved.
He could have argued the right of the state to limit the sale of sex toys without going to the extreme. And this is an extreme argument.
Totally misleading headline that will find root in the twit world where facts are completely ignored. Unfortunately this will be believed by many who are too lazy to check the facts.
Liken it to how every lefty thinks Sarah Palin said that she could see Russia from her front porch. She did not. That absurdity was uttered by Tina Fey in a Saturday Night Live skit. What Palin said was that there were places in Alaska where one could see Russia, which is of course true.
“Legal incest”?
Diddling yourself is “incest”?
Wait, what?
o.O
The best diagram of political belief is not a ruler that goes from left to right, but a circle, where you have left & right & authoritarian and libertarian, and if you go far enough left OR right, you end up at authoritarian.
The immaculate election.
The CBS headline on the original 2008 decision: Texas ban on sex toy sales overturned
A federal appeals court has overturned a statute outlawing sex toy sales in Texas, one of the last states - all in the South - to retain such a ban.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Texas law making it illegal to sell or promote obscene devices, punishable by as many as two years in jail, violated the right to privacy guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-ban-on-sex-toy-sales-overturned/
Eric Levitz is a left wing liberal and for him and others this is a top story that needs to be told
Reply to: “I am not going to critize Cruz for doing his job.
“However, is this the experience that is best suited to get our economy rolling? Bring jobs? Trade agreements? National debt?”
Actually, yes, it is. As several people have pointed out (and I think you already realize), but I’m going to try to make blindingly clear, it is the specific duty of the Texas Solicitor General to defend the laws of Texas when they are challenged in court. Regardless of whether he thinks it’s a good law or not, it is his duty to support the law enacted by the legislature, with the best arguments he can think of (without lying). What this means is that Senator Cruz has experience in actually performing the duties of his position—even when doing his duty opens him up to mockery. In an era when the Justice Department overrules the Congress, by deciding not to support federal laws in court, when the Justice Department doesn’t like those laws, this is the most important type of experience to bring to Washington. Solving any of the specific problems you mentioned can only be done on a foundation of officials who act honestly, and make it a point to perform their duties.
Not arguing the fact that the State of Texas was involved. Here is a link
to the legal document filed to the US Court of Appeal 5th Circuit. Cruz
is certainlly mentioned in list of Texas officails noted but he didn’t
sign the document.
My question is did he argue the case before the court or was it
argued by some other member of the Texas legal team? Do you know?
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2800804-Texas-Attorney-Greg-Abbott-s-Appellee-s-Legal.html
:: It’s a huge error for a master debater like Cruz ::
For myself, I prefer to think of Cruz as a “cunning linguist”.
1. It was his job as as the Texas Solicitor General to defend the Texas law that was passed by elected officials in the Texas legislature and signed by the Texas governor. I don’t particularly care how he personally feels about those products, but I like that he and the Texas Attorney General did their jobs to the best of their ability.
2. His defense in court of a Texas law has essentially nothing to do with how he would govern as President of the United States (a position he is most likely to reach if Trump chooses him as VP and Cruz then follows Trump in office).
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.