Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: neverdem
Very interesting article but I think the author is wrong about the significance of the high court's choice of standard of review in the Lawrence case. Using the rational basis test does not elevate the rights to a higher status than "fundamental" simply because the governmental entity in question failed (in the minds of SCOTUS) to establish a rational basis for its statute.

For this reason he is also probably wrong when he says: "But no fourth option truly presents itself, for there is no form of legal reasoning that can distinguish a “right” to commit homosexual sodomy from a “right” to marry your sister and raise a family." A court may very well find a rational basis for prohibiting incestuous marriage.
8 posted on 08/04/2005 12:53:57 PM PDT by BenLurkin (O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: BenLurkin; 45Auto

"For this reason he is also probably wrong when he says: "But no fourth option truly presents itself, for there is no form of legal reasoning that can distinguish a “right” to commit homosexual sodomy from a “right” to marry your sister and raise a family." A court may very well find a rational basis for prohibiting incestuous marriage."

That are complete morons if they can't. see #27


28 posted on 08/04/2005 1:59:10 PM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson