Posted on 02/16/2007 8:05:09 AM PST by Abathar
Sex Toy Ban Has Wiggle Room Before Starting
The buzz in Alabama this week was over a vibrator ruling.
A federal appeals court ruled that the state's ban on sex toys is constitutional.
But the adult playthings won't be disappearing immediately. The state attorney general's office has agreed not to enforce the law pending further appeals.
The appeals court held that the state legislature could ban sex toy sales in the interest of preserving public morality. Sherri Williams, who owns the Pleasures adult toy shops in Huntsville and Decatur, is among those who challenged the law.
She said she's disappointed the court made it's ruling on Valentine's Day. The decision, dated Wednesday, was released Thursday.
It's hard to imagine that banning sex toys (on some general notion that they would harm "public morality") is constitutional, but banning gay sodomy (on the proven notion that it burdens society do to the increased incidence of HIV and Aids, as well as other sexually transmitted diseases) is unconstitutional.
I'd rather it be the other way around.
Well, before the (mis)interpretation of the 14th amendment, the federal constitution did not preclude states from enacting their own laws that might be more restrictive than those the federal government was allowed to impose.
This is a state law, not a federal law. It's not the congress banning the toys, it's a state government.
News from Alabamastan!!
I completely agree. If they are banned under morales laws then I can think of far worse things that gays do to each other.
"Meanwhile, cucumbers are still legal"
LOL, so are zucchini.
...and they're both organic, renewable resources; very ecofriendly.
Probably on the grounds that the Alabama State Constitutions allows for it. Given what I've read about the Alabama Constitution, it's quite likely, as there are a massive number of very specific Amendments to it.
In the absence of a U.S. Constitution word on the matter, the states, via their constitutions, can generally do whatever they want to.
Anything not spelled out at the federal level is left to the states to determine but what is it that gives the state that power over people's lives? Just because it says so?
H Clinton is all atitter over this ruling, while the state of Alabama is all abuzz over it, er because of it, er, well you get the ... oops, almost made an error there.
But there has to be a meaningful relationship between the regulated entity and 'public morality.' I can't just randomly ban things (popcorn, staplers, whatever) without explaing why. So what is the 'public morality' relevance of this law?
Not "just because it says so" but because it is duly authorized to do so by a properly adopted state constitution or amendment.
That is, presuming the state constitution actually does have such a provision, which is a guess, but I'm not pouring through the 700+ amendments of the Alabama constitution to find out for sure. I'm mostly talking in the theoretical realm here anyway.
Will hardware store owners be jailed for selling shower heads?
Next they'll ban cucumbers from the produce section.
I know there's a law against "sexual battery". Aren't those the kind you put in them vibrators?
Alabama's Harley dealers dodged a bullet they didn't even know was out there.
Depends on the product features...
Nah, I'm afraid that is not legal.
In Alabama, you may not have an ice cream cone in your back pocket at any time.
States are allowed to make and pass silly laws that make no sense what so ever as long as they do not violate the Federal or State Constitution.
Yeah!! And while we're at it, let's outlaw blasphemy, too - that'd be extra refreshing!!!
<\sarcasm>
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.