"To the extent Bowers relied on values we share with a wider civilization, it should be noted that the reasoning and holding in Bowers have been rejected elsewhere. The European Court of Human Rights has followed not Bowers but its own decision in Dudgeon v. United Kingdom. See P. G. & J. H. v. United Kingdom, App. No. 00044787/98, ;56 (Eur. Ct. H. R., Sept. 25, 2001); Modinos v. Cyprus, 259 Eur. Ct. H. R. (1993); Norris v. Ireland, 142 Eur. Ct. H. R. (1988). Other nations, too, have taken action consistent with an affirmation of the protected right of homosexual adults to engage in intimate, consensual conduct. See Brief for Mary Robinson et al. as Amici Curiae 11-12. The right the petitioners seek in this case has been accepted as an integral part of human freedom in many other countries. There has been no showing that in this country the governmental interest in circumscribing personal choice is somehow more legitimate or urgent." [emphasis added]
So sayeth Justices Kennedy, Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, and O'Connor in LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS.
Two thirds of the United States Supreme Court openly decide their rulings of United States constitutionality based on foreign law and precedents, and they are hailed instead of impeached. But let jurors in this country use their own moral values and consult the Bible in the process, the same Bible those six Justices swore on when taking the oath of office, well that's wrong. (And a murdering rapist gets to live a long life of eating and drinking at our expense.) Good thing the jurors didn't say they prayed about their decision, otherwise they'd be arrested for engaging in a religious practice on government property.
I wonder what would have happened if they came into the lobby of the courthouse and saw a marble slab with the Ten Commandments there .