[Torie]

Yes, Rosen's article did have certain echoes. It is amazing how slow the media has been to get all of this, and Sullivan hasn't gained any clue at all, yet.

The fact of the matter though, is that by the application of any consistent principle, if we have Griswald and Roe, we must have the result in Lawrence. Sexual intimacy is the most private act, and contraception is less so, but still far more "private" than the election to have an abortion. It seem quite obvious to me, but maybe I simple don't "get it."

A contra result in Lawrence while leaving Roe and Griswald on the books is close to a scandal, which is why Bowers was a scandal, and needed to fall.

[aristeides]

As far as I know, Sullivan has still had nothing to say about Limon. Very strange, since he was originally so outraged by Limon's treatment.

[aristeides]

I thought Bowers was a scandal when it happened myself, but I became reconciled to the Supreme Court's inconsistency over time: at least they were keeping the Roe rationale cabined in the abortion context. Lawrence has opened the floodgates, and, if the Supreme Court is not administered a stern lesson, there's no telling what it may lead to.