Replies

I don’t understand what you’re trying to get at. Sure, there are people of various religions with a label pinned on who don’t believe or practice what their religion teaches. I don’t know what that has to do with the discussion.

And most people who think being “gay” is fine, would NOT think it was fine if they knew the truth about the dangers, filth and criminality associated with the “gay” life. Most people if they were fully informed would not be so positive.

With laws against sodomy, it stays private. Now with a stupid/evil SCOTUS decision taking that right away from states, sodomy is practically speaking forced upon everyone, one way or another.

Swirling down the dreain.

I agree with you. Lawrence v. Texas is simply the latest in a line of cases affirming the mythical right of privacy in the Constitution. While it may seem like a particularly egregious breach of states' rights, it is actually very consistent with the Court's prior decisions that have abrogated the rights of states to regulate moral issues under the guise of a right to privacy. The first case that started the ball rolling was Griswold v. Connecticut, where the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for the state of Connecticut to ban the use of contraceptives because it interfered with a married couple's fundamental right to privacy. From Griswold we got Roe, which gives you the unfettered right to kill your baby in the first trimester, and a somewhat fettered right to kill your baby in the second trimester of pregnancy. This of course led us to Lawrence (which overturned Bowers).

The problem with unconstitutional decisions like this (besides the fact that they're unconstitutional), is that they are obviously very hard to overturn. Roe v. Wade could be overturned if Kennedy resigned and was replaced by a pro-life justice, which would return the matter to the states. When it comes to Lawrence, however, I think that's probably a lost cause. I think that most state legislatures with sodomy laws on the books repealed them after Lawrence. Some state courts also struck them down, citing Lawrence as binding precedent. I don't think there is the political will in this country to recriminalize sodomy, even in very conservative states. By my count, only 14 of the 50 states still had sodomy laws on the books by the time the court decided Lawrence. State legislatures in conservative states like Wyoming, South Dakota and Nebraska had already voluntarily repealed the laws before Lawrence. Your state of Oregon repealed it in 1972. Conservative politicians have already shifted their focus to the fight to stop homosexual marriage -- they have given up on sodomy laws. Who can blame them? With all of the homosexual stuff on TV these days, it seems like everyone has exposure to at least the good and sunny parts of the lifestyle.

I've said it many times before, but the focus should be on restoring a constitutional form of government -- one that respects the rights of states to regulate these moral issues and lets people vote with their feet. If you don't want sodomy laws, don't live in Texas. If you don't want legalized marijuana, don't live in California.