Replies

The 4th Amendment has nothing to do with this at all. Period.

Gimme a break!

Following that reasoning, the states would be allowed to enter your home to search for unregistered guns or undeclared income.

The 4th Amendment, as a part of the supreme law of the land, guarantees us that no branch of government, at any level, has a right to violate the privacy of your home without probable cause, usually backed up by a warrant, but always supported by oath or affirmation. Since the Texas sodomy law violated that guarantee, the 4th Amendment has everything to do with it.

I wonder if you would feel the same about state laws that allowed police to enter your home on flimsy hearsay evidence, to search for guns. Regardless of how much you may dislike queers, when you deny them their rights, you open the door to having your own similar rights denied.

I have no respect for queers. They are either mentally or physically sick and they refuse to seek a cure. Even so, I will defend their rights under the Constitution, just as I would defend yours. An attack on the rights of one citizen, even a queer, is an attack on the rights of every citizen. Like it or not, the 4th Amendment, as does the rest of the Constitution, protects all of us equally.

At the contitutional convention, Governeur Morris gave a long impassioned speech objecting to impeachment, so that the president would not be looking over his shoulder. Upon the conclusion of the speech, Benjamin Franklin asked to be recognized. "If the President could not be removed by impeachment, he could be removed by assination." Branklin sat. Stunned silence. Governeur Morris asked once again to be recognized. "I withdraw my previous objection to impeachment."

and that is how we got impeachment.

Since the Texas sodomy law violated that guarantee, the 4th Amendment has everything to do with it.

Where do you guys get this crap from? The majority decision clearly states that the Lawrence case was NOT a fourth amendment case because due process was followed.

How's Mork these days?

What kind of "Action." Unmentionable, I guess.

This has zilch to do with powers to search. This has to do with what happens if in the normal course of due process (including the full panoply of probable cause and all that jazz) the act comes to light. Such as during a search for some other reason, as what happened in Lawrence. Or if witnesses testify to it.

Well. The case was decided in violation of the 9th Amendment. A reading of the history of the case provides the facts that: 1) there was a complaint of 'possibly violent activity' phoned into the cop-shop; and 2) the responding police heard all kinds of noises.

You may choose to argue that their entry into the apartment was a violation of the 4th; but your argument defies common sense.

And if you think the 4th is important (I do), have you YET written your Congresscritter about the "Patriot Act" which prima facie violates about every word, one-by-one and in-sequence, of the 4th?

Finally, I know a lot of homosexuals and some are friends of mine (and no, this is not a sarcastic quotation...) I do NOT despise nor dislike them as a class.

Having said that, if they are predators, or actively seeking "marriage" rights, I will fight them tooth and nail.