Sex and Eugene Volokh

The Virginian ^ | 5/30/2008 | Moneyrunner

[moneyrunner]

The Volokh conspiracy is a blog with a focus on things legal. Eugene Volokh is a law professor at UCLA. And as cases involving sex are litigated, he and his cohorts comment on them, frequently citing the law and linking to the actual decisions handed down.

Eugene appears to be of a Libertarian bent and favors homosexual marriage. This is not too surprising since I believe, but can’t prove, that most academics do. To take a position otherwise would appear to be discriminatory and is certainly not in keeping with the evolution of our “living constitution.”

In this context, it is fascinating to see discussions of the controversy surrounding the Texas FLDS litigation. For those who have not been following this is a recent case in which Texas Child Protective Services (CPS) raided a ranch (Yearning for Zion Ranch) run by a polygamous group known as the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Over 400 children were taken from their mothers and farmed out to foster homes based on the theory that they were in imminent danger.

A lower court agreed, an appeals court disagreed and the Texas Supreme Court agreed with the appeals court and ordered the children back to their parents.

Here is the part that I find interesting. Modern Liberalism demands that we get our noses out of other people’s bedrooms. It demands that we approve of homosexual practices and that we give our approval to homosexual marriages. But it has a visceral, prudish reaction to certain other sexual practices, demanding that – for example – people who approve of the marriage of teen aged girls to much older men be prosecuted.

[moneyrunner]

If the courts find that it is required of the constitution that John and Bill should be allowed to marry, why do those who believe this, not only from a moral perspective but from a legal one, stop short of Frank marrying Jill, Mary, Elsie and Sophie?

[Alia]

You are being way to hard on these folks, moneyrunner. They are still trying to get straight on the fact that 1+1=2. Now, there ya go adding more numbers to the mix.

Yes, lol, the gay marriage ruling is indeed about adding "numbers" to the mix.

[pogo101]

Volokh is NOT a “living Constitution” type, and there is a huge difference between favoring (or not opposing) civil “gay marriage” on the one hand, and believing that a guaranteed RIGHT TO such gay marriages already is in the states’ and nation’s constitutions. A bad accusation, IMO.

[CharlesWayneCT]

A weird blog entry, it mentions Volkoff, but doesn’t provide links to anything he wrote, and then calls on him to respond to the blog, but there’s no indication he’d even bother to read the blog.

And his web site isn’t even in the blog link list.....

[moneyrunner]

The name is Volokh. And if you will click on the link it will take you to my blog site where there is a link to Volokh’s site.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Sorry about the misspelling. I did click your link, and I just did it again to see again. And the blog entry seems to have no links to his site, and here is your list of links on the side:

Patterico's Pontifications 
InstaPundit 
Belmont Club 
Captain's Quarters 
Jihad Watch 
Little Green Footballs 
Pajamas Media 
James Lileks - The Bleat 
American Digest 
Power Line 
Ace of Spades HQ 
Bearing Drift 
Doug Ross

Which of those is his? I thought he ran the Volokh Conspiracy?

[moneyrunner]

I regret the confusion. I usually put the link in the headline. If you put your curser on the headline you’ll see it’s a link.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Wow. I guess if I was a regular I’d know that.

When I clicked on that before, the link didn’t work, so I didn’t check to see where it was trying to send me.

BTW, I just clicked on it again, and again the link failed (but I looked at what it was and I could see it went to volokh.com).