Posted on 04/14/2016 3:09:33 AM PDT by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies
Ted Cruz once argued that Americans have no constitutional right to bear dildos, that the government has a legitimate interest in discouraging "autonomous sex," and that allowing the sale of sex toys is the first step on the road to legal incest.....
....On Wednesday, the magazine published an exposé detailing Cruz's defense of a ban on sex-toy sales while serving as the Texas solicitor general. Back in 2004, several adult-plaything providers challenged a Texas law that banned the sale and promotion of "obscene devices."......The plaintiffs founded their challenge on the Fourteenth Amendment's right to privacy,...... A federal judge turned the company down, it appealed, and in 2007 it fell to Cruz's legal team to keep dildos from undermining the fabric of Western civilization.
In a 76-page brief calling on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to stand with the lower court, Cruz's office wrote that "any alleged right associated with obscene devices" is not "deeply rooted in the Nation's history and traditions."..... While Cruz acknowledged that,......government could not ban the "private use of obscene devices," it could ban their sale so as to uphold "public morals." What's more, while the government can't forbid citizens from masturbating, it has a legitimate interest in "discouraging ... autonomous sex." Cruz's team went on to declare, "There is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one's genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship."
The appeals court disagreed in a 2–1 decision, which held that the government has no business encroaching on Americans' most private of affairs. But Cruz and Texas attorney general Greg Abbott....battled on, filing a brief requesting a hearing before the full court of appeals, claiming the three-judge panel had overstepped the precedent set by Lawrence. Cruz's office argued that the prior ruling would give all manner of deviants grounds to claim that "engaging in consensual adult incest or bigamy" must be legal as they have a right to "enhance their sexual experiences." They lost the motion and ultimately chose not to bring the matter to the Supreme Court.
....from the rest of the article:
Cruz has never discussed his views on dildo commerce during the 2016 campaign, and it’s unlikely that many of his supporters know his history on such matters. It’s difficult to gauge the effect this news will have on Cruz’s standing with the electorate, as exit polls neglected to ask Republican primarygoers about their affinity for sexual devices.
Regardless, the American people deserve to know whether Cruz still holds such an expansive view of the government’s right to regulate public morality. There are undoubtedly no small number of patriots in this country who would tell President Cruz’s jackbooted thugs, “I’ll give you my dildo when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.”
.Ted Cruz talks about watching hardcore porn with his daughters in the audience .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML6lpDP8c20
I am going to refrain from commenting on this.
In other news so did you.
you people have no limits do you?
I do not believe this is the argument Cruz was making before the court.
More succinctly, it was the MANNER in which these “sex toys” were being represented to potential purchasers, and not being sufficiently selective in limiting the purchasers to “adult” customers.
That these “sex toys” exist, and perhaps have since the dawn of civilization in some form or another, was not what was being argued. This sales traffic has always been occurring, as excavations of ancient civilizations have shown. But it is to be kept to limited channels, which has always been the part of the social contract, as a condition of doing business. People will still always be people, and some have less self control than others. There is an obligation on the part of the rest of society to divert and provide a means of expressing these urges that do not include sexual assault upon the innocent or unwilling.
Trump gets excoriated for repeating the p-word at a rally of adults but we’re supposed to look the other way when Cruz discusses, on TV with his two young daughters present, watching porn?
Oh, no, the “Face of God” candidate doesn’t get a pass on this one.
It’s what defense attorney’s do
Thats a mighty Christian attitude that you have
I’ll bet ISIS and the Taliban would agree with him.
So you signed up last month to post this crap?
I am not going to critize Cruz for doing his job.
However, is this the experience that is best suited to get our economy rolling? Bring jobs? Trade agreements? National debt?
This is not the Victorian Age and FR is not a Sanctuary.
The fact that Ted Cruz argued the case to the Appellate level and considering taking his “anti-sexual device case” (omitted the “D” word for virgin eyes) to The Supreme Court of the United States speaks volumes.
Humor aside, his argument that the utilization of such devices would condone “engaging in consensual adult incest or bigamy” is an absurd argument.
It’s a huge error for a master debater like Cruz to present to the court. And a classic example of the slippery slope fallacy -. A slippery slope argument proposes that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant (usually negative) effect.
Jerk.
What? Posting a video of Cruz from his CNN family town hall??
He likes to tell the story - there are other clips of him telling it.
I 2nd that!
JERK
Thank God there aren’t any lawyers in heaven.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.