And by what rationale may a state now forbid bestiality, or consensual (in the will) necrophilia or cannibalism? What if a deceased "life partner" consents to having his tattooed skin made into outerwear for his life-partner?
After this ruling, every father is free to spend 18 years seducing his children, and taking them as sex partners on their 18th birthdays, and even marrying them.
Can anyone explain to me why states may NOT outlaw one perversion, but MAY outlaw other "consensual" perversions, such as the ones I have listed?
As a point of law, marriage is a government institution to begin with, and so the government may regulate that institution accordingly. The correct parallel would be that between sodomy & adultery, not between sodomy & bigamy.
And by what rationale may a state now forbid bestiality, or consensual (in the will) necrophilia or cannibalism?
Many states (including Texas) don't forbid bestiality - and really have no legal basis for doing so except as a form of animal cruelty. As for necrophilia, I think that's outlawed in only 24 states; forty years ago it was legal in every state. However, it has been decided that one's dignity in life extends somewhat to dignity in death, and so both necrophilia and cannibalism falls under that realm (i.e. desecration). I'm altogether uncertain how the law would regard an outright contractual agreement by one person to permit his or her sexual use and/or consumption after death....
After this ruling, every father is free to spend 18 years seducing his children, and taking them as sex partners on their 18th birthdays, and even marrying them.
On the final point, marriage itself is a government institution which the government may regulate accordingly. As for the first point, seduction prior to the age of consent would still violate child welfare laws. As for the middle point, that's slightly more problematic, but it's generally agreed that incest prohibitions pass the rational review threshold due to the state's interest in regulating inbreeding..