For whom is reckless driving LEGAL?
You are missing the big point. You cannot make something legal for one group and illegal for another. Oral and anal sex was LEGAL for heterosexuals, and ILLEGAL for homosexuals. So it wasnt government deciding on an activity that was illegal, it was just that a certain group of the population was not permitted to perform the same acts. That, my friend, by definition is discrimination.
That is a straw man and that is NOT what was happening and NOT what the case was decided upon or even argued upon.
People were not discriminated against -activities were discriminated against. Specifically, the Texas statute forbid two persons of the same sex to engage in certain intimate sexual conduct. It had nothing do with people that feel they are homosexual and had everything to do with homosexual activity which anyone can engage in and activity which Texas deemed as unhealthy, dangerous to individuals and a danger to society -something to be discouraged and penalized much as beastiality, prostitution, etcetera... Homosexual activity promotes disease and death -it is ungood...
Texas legislated the law and the leftists on the Supreme court by judicial fiat kicked the will of the people to the curb.
-an excerpt from Justice Scalia's dissent (which can be found numerous places on the webThe Court today does not overrule this holding. Not once does it describe homosexual sodomy as a “fundamental right” or a “fundamental liberty interest,” nor does it subject the Texas statute to strict scrutiny. Instead, having failed to establish that the right to homosexual sodomy is “‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition,’” the Court concludes that the application of Texas’s statute to petitioners’ conduct fails the rational-basis
The leftist Supremes threw reality out the window to impose their version of morality upon the people.
The decision was not based upon the court deciding that homosexual activity was deemed a fundamental right or fundamental liberty (it is still not despite the whining of homosexual activists). The erroneous decision was based upon the majority in the Court stating that the Texas Statute failed rational-basis e.g. the court leftist majority decreed that the Texas law was not necessary because it furthered no legitimate state interest! The basis for this liberal legislation from the bench was foreign law. Apparently if Europe legalizes homosexual activity then the US must follow suit (at least the leftists would argue such)!
LOL -No legitimate state interest according to Europe and the leftist Supremes -what about the citizens of the State?
I suggest you put the human rights, equal rights, and or illegitimate or unfair discrimnation platitudes back in thier pens -those dogs don't hunt in regards to the Lawrence decision.