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

To: RonF
This ruling concerns a sexual relationship between two consenting adults. The legality of sexual relationships that involve at least one entity who is legally defined as being unable to give consent due to a lack of capacity (age or mental status) aren't affected. yet

There is nothing in their reasoning to prevent it. They have no foundation to rest upon. They are making it up as they go, perhaps even subject to the latest in the porn fashion market.

As Justice Scalia pointed out, the battle lines are drawn, they are coming for us and our children. It is only a matter of time. It's really a shame Pat Buchanan is anti-Israel.

10 posted on 06/27/2003 9:15:16 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: af_vet_1981
There is nothing in their reasoning to prevent it. They have no foundation to rest upon.

Once again, for all those who apparently wont read the majority opinion:

from Kennedy's opinion:

"The present case does not involve minors. It does not involve persons who might be injured or coerced or who are situated in relationships where consent might not easily be refused. It does not involve public conduct or prostitution. It does not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter".

If that isn't clear, there is nothing in this decision based upon the case at hand that gives any legal arguments to public sex or government recognized queer marriages. The homos can clain some sort of "victory" all they want, but the things the radicals wan't will not come to pass because of this decision.

18 posted on 06/27/2003 11:22:50 AM PDT by HurkinMcGurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | 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