Replies

It is contemptible for the state to prosecute an 18 year old for having consensual relations with a 14 year old. But all the Limon decision did was say the sentences for heterosexual and homosexual offenses had to be equal. Is there a problem with that?

I don't share your opinion that it is contemptible to prosecute an 18-year-old for sex (consensual?) with a "mentally delayed" 14-year-old. The fact that you would call it "consensual" shows where you're coming from.

But, contemptible or not, what makes it unconstitutional? Lawrence? If so, that's my point.

"It is contemptible for the state to prosecute an 18 year old for having consensual relations with a 14 year old. "

Really? the mind boggles. you think society is better off with (homo)sexualized 14 year olds????!?

What is contemptible is thinkin mentally retarded 14 year olds can be preyed upon by older homosexual predators and some judges think they are doing good by stopping the state from protecting the youth from such incidences.

Homosexuality is one line crossed. the next is pedophilia. you have unwittingly admitted as much. Sad. sick and sad.

"But all the Limon decision did was say the sentences for heterosexual and homosexual offenses had to be equal. "

There is nothing in the constitution that truly requires this. judicial tyranny writ large. If it is better public policy to make the sentences the same, the democratic porcess can and should take care of it.

As it is, the judges have created evil and injust outcomes in the name of a 'principle' that has no coherence or validity.