BUT the SCOTUS ruled in Lawrence that these same deviant acts were permissible because they were expressions of homosexuality, ie, to keep them illegal was to deny homosexuals their right to “love”.
Scalia said at the time it would lead to this day and damn if it didn’t.
Where is his argument from that case?
[[BUT the SCOTUS ruled in Lawrence that these same deviant acts were permissible because they were expressions of homosexuality,]]
What the hell is that supposed to mean? The ‘acts are permissible’ because ‘they are an expression of ‘love’”?
By that same twisted reasoning, acts of pedophilia, bestiality, necromancy, polygamy etc etc etc are all ‘permissible’ because they ‘are an expression of love’
Surely there was more to the Lawrence ruling than that? If not then that is insane! Homosexual acts are a deviation- a deviation every bit as immoral as any other deviant behavior- These supreme court judges can’t just arbitrarily pick and choose which pet deviant behaviors they allow- either they allow all or they allow none!