Posted on 05/19/2003 7:42:20 AM PDT by Remedy
BURGER, C.J., Concurring Opinion Decisions of individuals relating to homosexual conduct have been subject to state intervention throughout the history of Western civilization. Condemnation of those practices is firmly rooted in Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards. Homosexual sodomy was a capital crime under Roman law.... During the English Reformation, when powers of the ecclesiastical courts were transferred to the King's Courts, the first English statute criminalizing sodomy was passed.... Blackstone described "the infamous crime against nature" as an offense of "deeper malignity" than rape, a heinous act "the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature," and "a crime not fit to be named." W. Blackstone, Commentaries . The common law of England, including its prohibition of sodomy, became the received law of Georgia and the other Colonies. In 1816, the Georgia Legislature passed the statute at issue here, and that statute has been continuously in force in one form or another since that time. To hold that the act of homosexual sodomy is somehow protected as a fundamental right would be to cast aside millennia of moral teaching.
Thomas Jefferson on Sodomy Sect. XIV. Whosoever shall be guilty of rape, polygamy, or sodomy* with a man or woman, shall be punished; if a man, by castration, a woman, by boring through the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch in diameter at the least. Peterson, Merrill D. "Crimes and Punishments" Thomas Jefferson: Writings Public Papers (Literary Classics of the United States, Inc. 1984) pp. 355, 356.
Hundreds rally for '10 Commandments judge' Moore wrote a separate concurring opinion, repudiating homosexuality on religious grounds, calling it "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature and of nature's God."
Texas Phys.Resource Council, Christian Med. & Dental Association, Catholic Med.Association
Texas has a legitimate interest in regulating public health, and the CDC has identified sexually transmitted diseases ("STDs") as a public health problem. Sodomy is an efficient method of transmitting STDs. And regardless of the reason, same-sex sodomy is far more effective in spreading STDs than opposite-sex sodomy. Multiple studies have estimated that 40 percent or more of men who practice anal sex acquire STDs. In fact, same-sex sodomy has resulted in the transformation of diseases previously transmitted only through fecally contaminated food and water into sexually caused diseases primarily among those who practice same-sex sodomy.
Legislators,State of Texas, Lawrence v. Texas, No. 02-102(SODOMY BRIEF) III. JUDICIAL INTERVENTION INTO CONTESTED POLITICAL QUESTIONS DISRUPTS THE PROPER POLITICAL STRUCTURE AND HARMS THE NATION.
Briefs filed at the United States Supreme Court - John G. Lawrence, et al. v. Texas, No. 02-102, American Center for Law and JusticeJay Alan Sekulow, Counsel of Record American Family AssociationStephen M. Crampton, Counsel of Record Center for Arizona PolicyThis brief refutes the errors expressed in the opposing amicus submitted by the American Psychology Association. Len L. Munsil, Counsel of Record Center for Law and Justice InternationalPat Monaghan, Counsel of Record Concerned Women for AmericaJanet M. LaRue, Counsel of Record Family Research Council & Focus on the FamilyRobert P. George, Counsel of Record Liberty CounselMathew D. Staver, Counsel of Record Pro Family Law CenterRichard Ackerman, Counsel of Record Texas Eagle Forum; Daughters of Liberty Republican Women of Houston, Texas; Spirit of Freedom Republican Women's ClubTeresa Stanton Collett, Counsel for Amici Curiae United Families International
Center For The Original Intent Of The Constitution (Lawrence V. Texas Sodomy Brief)
However, the Fourteenth Amendment, like the Thirteenth and Fifteenth, was intended to change the law. The core purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to overturn those state laws that failed to guarantee equal protection and due process to black Americans. This Court's "suspect classification" doctrine closely approximates this intention. With regard to race, all laws existing at the time of the ratification of the Amendment should have been considered presumptively unconstitutional. While this Court has built a complex system of suspect, intermediate, and rational classifications for Equal Protection analysis, it has never held that the Equal Protection Clause was designed to eliminate all state laws which make distinctions between people and their conduct.
The Fourteenth Amendment was surely not intended to make every discrimination between groups of people a constitutional denial of equal protection. Nor was the Enforcement Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment intended to permit Congress to prohibit every discrimination between groups of people. On the other hand, the Civil War Amendments were unquestionably designed to condemn and forbid every distinction, however trifling, on account of race.
OREGON V. MITCHELL , 400 U.S. 112, 127 (1970)(opinion of Black, J.).
This Court has been reluctant to expand the "suspect classification" to include every group seeking the protection of this constitutional status. SEE, E.G., SAN ANTONIO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT V. RODRIGUEZ , 411 U.S. 1 (1973) (wealth is not a suspect class); CLEBURNE V. CLEBURNE LIVING CENTER, INC. , 473 U.S. 432 (1985) (mental retardation is not a "quasi-suspect" classification). Lawyers lack no diligence in mining the phrases employed by this Court over the decades when endeavoring to argue that their clients should be included in this or another "protected" category. It is the words and phrases of the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment that must be dispositive if the principle of republicanism- WE ELECT THE RULERS WHO MAKE THE LAW -is to retain any meaning.
Amazon.com: Books: Legislating Morality: Is It Wise? Is It Legal ...
Nor does it impy any Heterosexual sodomy or sexual relations...the point is?
Our founding fathers were not into "sex-talk", they didn't think about such perversions, only because of the religious backgrounds each had. Homosexuality was considered sin then, as still is today.
Seems to me that this is exactly what Santorum (R-Pa) was saying...
this is exactly what Santorum (R-Pa) was saying...
and needed to be said.Support Sen. Santorum's strong stand for family (PETITION) 27,422 Signatures
Center For The Original Intent Of The Constitution (Lawrence V. Texas Sodomy Brief) list state laws equating homosexuality with bestiality. New York
That the detestable and abominable vice of buggery, committed with mankind, or beast, shall be from henceforth adjudged felony; and such order and form of process therein shall be used against the offenders, as in cases of felony at the common law; and that every person being thereof convicted, by verdict, confession, or outlawry, shall be hanged by the neck, until he or she shall be dead. LAWS OF NEW YORK, ch. . 21, p. 391 (passed February 14, 1787).
Ralph Neas et al. are going to be all over this one.
Only half would vote for Constitution
ED : Administration Cites Recent Surveys Showing Lack Of Basic Knowledge Of U.S. History
ED : Senate Panel Hears that Ignorance of U.S. History Poses Major Security Threat
@
US Senator Jeff Sessions - Sessions: Pryor has Bush support for ... Pryor, a political conservative, is known in legal circles as a strict constructionist. He is a member of the Federalist Society.
Attorney General Bill Pryor Named "Friend of the Taxpayer"
NewsCenter | In The News Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor Receives NRA-ILA Award
States of Alabama, South Carolina, and Utah, Texas Legislators is it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.