US Court Rejects Appeal on Ban on Sex Toy Sale

Reuters ^ | 02/22/05 | James Vicini

[Phantom Lord]

This should cause an arousing discussion.

[Paradox]

C'mon folks, stand up and be counted!

I guess I am all up for states rights, but sheesh..

[Conspiracy Guy]

I'll comment when I get back from Mississippi. Dang!

[Smedley]

A federal judge ruled against the state and found a constitutional "right to use sexual devices like ... vibrators, dildos, anal beads and artificial vaginas."

I guess this is written in the 69th amendment?

[DM1]

"It exempted sales of sexual devices "for a bona fide medical, scientific, educational, legislative, judicial or law enforcement purpose." "
I want to see what kind of sexual device is used for Law Enforcement purposes - freeze! dont make me use this vibrator!!

[Publius Scipio]

The law prohibited the distribution of "any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs.

On what basis?

[MisterRepublican]

"...the case raised important issues about the scope of the constitutional right to sexual privacy."

The Constitution doesn't mention a right "sexual privacy" as far as I know.

[TheBigB]

I love my home state, but jeeminee. WHAT BUSINESS IS IT OF YOURS??

[Smedley]

Look, I'm all for people using whatever inanimate objects they want in the privacy of their bedrooms.

I just don't think that it's a Constitutional right.

[TheBigB]

P.J. sez..."from my cold, dead...well, you get the idea."

PING to the REPUBLICAN PARTY REPTILE ping list! What is the Republican Party Reptile? It is a creature of the eighties. It's neoconservatism with its pants down around its ankles, the Rehnquist Supreme Court on drugs, a disco Hobbes living without shame or federally mandated safety regulations. The Republican Party Reptile supports a strong defense policy, but sees no reason to conduct it while sober. The RPR believes in minimum government interference in private affairs; unless the government brings over extra girls and some ice. In short, the RPR is the new label that our political spectrum has been crying out for; the conservative with a sense of humor and a healthy dose of depravity.

[conserv13]

That is a good question - why isn't viagra banned? Its a sexual aid. Also, the exemptions for 'legitimate medical purpose' - that is pretty vague.

[cjshapi]

Damn, some of the folks in your state are no fun!

[Paradox]

I just don't think that it's a Constitutional right.

Its not, but it does point out that there are some boneheaded lawmakers in Alabama.. that and perhaps a lazy populace.

[Durus]

If you cared at all about freedom, or understood the basic concept of a constitutional republic, you would know that to have a right it doesn't need to written in the constitution. The constitution was written to delineate the powers of government. A better question would be "where does government have the enumerated power to ban sex toys".

[Modernman]

The law prohibited the distribution of "any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs." First-time violators can face a fine of up to $10,000 and as much as one year in jail.

I'm glad that Alabama has solved all of its other problems and can now focus on keeping chicks from enjoying their battery-operated buddy.

[Fierce Allegiance]

I can't legally buy fireworks in CT, but I manage to get 'em. I'm sure these people can figure out a way to get their fake wanker yankers and canyon probes.

[malakhi]

On what basis?

Abject horror that someone, somewhere, might be having a good time.

[Modernman]

A better question would be "where does government have the enumerated power to ban sex toys".

DING DING DING. No more calls, we have a winner.

[conserv13]

The 9th Amendment is pretty vague, but you could argue that it applies here.

[Smedley]

The constitution was written to delineate the powers of government. A better question would be "where does government have the enumerated power to ban sex toys".

States have always had an inherent right to police and regulatory powers. Whether or not they should outlaw selling sex toys is a political issue, not a constitutional issue. I'm not siding with alabama on this, merely stating that the Constitution is not a panacea protecting the sale and distribution of dildos