Skip to comments.
SCALIA'S MORALITY OF PREJUDICE
The Daily Dish - andrewsullivan.com ^
| Thursday, June 26, 2003
| Andrew Sullivan
Posted on 06/26/2003 8:18:40 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-154 next last
To: Luis Gonzalez
Senator Santorum deserves an appology from the homosexuals. He was absolutly correct in his assesment.
same sex marriage is part of this decision in the eyes of homosexuals.
Adult incest is now legal according to this ruling.
To: longtermmemmory
Could you point me to any litigation in any State seeking to legalize incest?
The Court addressed only the issue before it...the Texas sodomy law.
3
posted on
06/26/2003 8:23:03 PM PDT
by
Luis Gonzalez
(Cuba será libre...soon.)
To: Luis Gonzalez
...homosexual dignity...Isn't that what I'm supposed see during gay-pride parades?
4
posted on
06/26/2003 8:23:07 PM PDT
by
Libloather
(Gimme fuel, gimme fire, gimme that which I desire - ewww...)
To: Libloather
"Isn't that what I'm supposed see during gay-pride parades?"You watch those?
EWWWWWW!!!
5
posted on
06/26/2003 8:24:16 PM PDT
by
Luis Gonzalez
(Cuba será libre...soon.)
To: longtermmemmory
Adult incest is now legal according to this ruling. And that would be a totally erroneous interpretation. Nice try. The grounds of the decision do not please me, but simply just freaking out and venting with whatever string of words makes a poster feel good, is not really very helpful.
6
posted on
06/26/2003 8:25:14 PM PDT
by
Torie
To: Luis Gonzalez
Homosexual groups are already lining up their same sex marriage cases according to their evening comments.
Re Adult incest: Since sexual behavior by two consenting adults in the bedroom can not be regulated, it only follows that sexual behavior between two consenting adults in the bedroom can not be regulated.
To: Luis Gonzalez
Homosexual groups are already lining up their same sex marriage cases according to their evening comments.
Re Adult incest: Since sexual behavior by two consenting adults in the bedroom can not be regulated, it only follows that sexual behavior between two consenting adults in the bedroom can not be regulated.
If two consenting adults want to figure out what this Oedepus or Electra complex thing is about, they now have a constitutional privacy right to do so in the privacy of their bedroom.
To: Luis Gonzalez
Sullivan is a bit of a whimp for going for the nuclear option for his passion. He should have preferred to fight it out, and win, in the public square. But the scope of the grounds for this decision are breath-taking. SCOTUS can decide anytime it wants what rights are essential to the liberty to exercise one's fundamental personage. I can see a leftist court delving into the economic and redistributionist realm with this line of thinking. Being broke and unable to afford anything advertised on TV might be deemed a denial of the exercise of fundamental personage. It also denies equal protection, and is probably also cruel and unusual punishment. It probably violates several Constitutional provisions all at once.
9
posted on
06/26/2003 8:32:14 PM PDT
by
Torie
To: longtermmemmory
How exactly would you "regulate it"?
10
posted on
06/26/2003 8:38:29 PM PDT
by
Luis Gonzalez
(Cuba será libre...soon.)
To: Luis Gonzalez
You watch those? EWWWWWW!!!Oh, no. But while channel surfing, I do run across the Howard Stern show, the E channel, the latest Miller commercial, or local coverage of some parade in some city celebrating its so-called diversity.
These days, it's kinda hard to avoid...
11
posted on
06/26/2003 8:43:34 PM PDT
by
Libloather
(Gimme fuel, gimme fire, gimme that which I desire - ewww...)
To: Torie
But the scope of the grounds for this decision are breath-taking. SCOTUS can decide anytime it wants what rights are essential to the liberty to exercise one's fundamental personage.
By federalizing homosexual behavior in the manner that it has, the Supremes have left us operating without the restraint of States Rights on any behavioral topic which burrs in their saddle.
Horses gone, barn burned. "Breath-taking" is an understatement.
To: Luis Gonzalez
The decision in no way a conduit to the legal right to marry. However, the incestuos argument can be applied to this decision. It would have been interesting to have this case revolve around a brother and sister claiming that incestuous laws infringe on their right to privacy. Or more realistically, as case of a niece and uncle.
What would have been the Court's ruling even though states in the past have recognized certain incestuous marriages such as New Jersey back in the 50's and 40's and some did not.
What a day makes when you have had a recent decisions like this one and just a few days eralier you had this one.
http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1055929020255940.xml Or past decisions that deal with incestuous marriages.
http://www.yu.edu/faculty/stein/familylaw2002/May's_Estate.doc
Comment #14 Removed by Moderator
Comment #15 Removed by Moderator
To: longtermmemmory
Adult incest is now legal according to this ruling. HUH????????????
16
posted on
06/26/2003 9:01:54 PM PDT
by
Gabz
(anti-smokers = personification of everything wrong in this country)
To: Luis Gonzalez
Once you acknowledge the dignity of gays as a social class, once you have conceded that their private sexual and emotional lives cannot be reduced to a single sexual act...
Homosexuality and dignity? Now there's an oxymoron!
Their whole lives are defined around, "Sexual acts."
The last spin down on the spiral to the death of a great nation. As someone has said, first we lose our hatred for the abominable, then we tolerate, then we embrace.
Reminded me last night of a Bible verse:
2Ch 36:16 But they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of the LORD arose against his people, till there was no remedy.
President Bush, Remember good king Asa who broke down the houses of the sodomites.
May God raise us some men and women who will fight this garbage!
17
posted on
06/26/2003 9:03:41 PM PDT
by
TFMcGuire
(Vote Right and you'll never vote wrong!)
To: longtermmemmory
....they now have a constitutional privacy right to do so in the privacy of their bedroom. And why do you have a problem with what 2 consenting adults do beind closed doors???????
I will tell you right now - I don't want you anywhere near my house and what my husband and I do in our bedroom.
18
posted on
06/26/2003 9:06:16 PM PDT
by
Gabz
(anti-smokers = personification of everything wrong in this country)
To: TFMcGuire
"Their whole lives are defined around, "Sexual acts."Not really. We define them by their engaging in a sexual act that we consider to be unnatural, so we define them by their sexuality.
19
posted on
06/26/2003 9:06:27 PM PDT
by
Luis Gonzalez
(Cuba será libre...soon.)
Comment #20 Removed by Moderator
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-154 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson