[tpaine]

betty boop;
" -- would you kindly explain to me from what text in the Constitution have the federal courts received any grant whatever to rule on issues involving sexuality?"
-BB-



Our general rights to life & liberty pretty well encompress sexual rights Betty, - there's no need to enumerate them. Thus the courts powers granted under Art III apply to 'sexuality' issues, when such issues are violated.
The constitutional principle that life, liberty and property cannot be denied by fed/state/local 'laws' that violate due process, -- must be upheld.
Obviously, the court felt that the case in question defined that principle in private sexual matters.
Let us hope that the same principle can now be used to strike down the 'wars' on guns, drugs, and 'sin' that our prohibitionist brethren insist on fighting.
Where do you stand on such prohibitory type laws, Betty?
122 -tpaine-


Sexual rights??????? Jeepers, tpaine -- think about what you're saying here -- "rights" is a freaking political term. Do you actually approve of the "politicization of sex???" If the politician gets a toe-hold there, how can he be stopped from intruding anywhere else? Can you spell: "B-I-G_B-R-O-T-H-E-R"?
-BB-


Jeepers betty, here I kindly explained to you about what text in the Constitution applies to the federal courts that granted them power to rule on issues involving sexuality;

-- and the best you can do in reply is to play word games that such "rights" are "a freaking political term."?

You're slipping kid.

Maybe you've been hanging with FR's 'spinners' a bit too much.

[betty boop]

...[it was the Fourteenth Amendment as applied to] the federal courts that granted them power to rule on issues involving sexuality....

I gather that means you don't have a single problem with the idea of the federal government "inserting itself" (so to speak) into this most intimate sphere of human life.... If they can "go there," honey, they can "go anywhere." Capice?

What does that do to human liberty, human dignity?