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

To: ninenot
Look, the case wasn't about the wisdom of sodomy, it was about whether it should be a felony, so that persons engaging in consensual sex acts should be liable to being imprisoned in the penitentiary.

Completely different things.
219 posted on 06/26/2003 8:34:35 PM PDT by CobaltBlue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies ]


To: CobaltBlue
Look, the case wasn't about the wisdom of sodomy, it was about whether it should be a felony, so that persons engaging in consensual sex acts should be liable to being imprisoned in the penitentiary.

The offense of homosexual sodomy carried no jail time in Harris County, the maximum penalty was a fine. A felony? Please explain.

224 posted on 06/27/2003 12:49:52 AM PDT by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies ]

To: CobaltBlue
The case was about Texas' right to make and enforce such laws. The Supremes continue to derogate the 9th Amendment by relying on invented "privacy," and on Zeitgeist PC.

233 posted on 06/27/2003 6:55:01 AM PDT by ninenot (Joe McCarthy was RIGHT, but Drank Too Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies ]

To: CobaltBlue
Look, the case wasn't about the wisdom of sodomy, it was about whether it should be a felony, so that persons engaging in consensual sex acts should be liable to being imprisoned in the penitentiary

No it wasn't; the Texas law in question is a misdemeanor, punishable by fine ($150 or $200 in this case).

252 posted on 06/28/2003 2:48:30 PM PDT by Technogeeb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | 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