Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Alabama ban on sex toys is struck down as unconstitutional
Associated Press | October 11, 2002

Posted on 10/11/2002 1:29:58 PM PDT by HAL9000

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) -- An Alabama law banning the sale of sex toys was struck down by a federal judge as a violation of the right to privacy.

"The fundamental right of privacy, long recognized by the Supreme Court as inherent among our constitutional protections, incorporates a right to sexual privacy,'' U.S. District Judge Lynwood Smith Jr. said Wednesday.

He said the state did not prove it has a legitimate interest in banning the sale of sex devices for use in private, consensual relationships between adults.

The 1998 law -- part of a package of legislation strengthening the state's obscenity law -- banned the sale of devices designed for "the stimulation of human genital organs.'' It was challenged by six women who either sell sex aids or said they need them for sexual gratification.

Copyright 2002 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Alabama
KEYWORDS: alabama; sextoys
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 221-222 next last
To: AntiGuv
I have seen cases where people have been charged and convicted for fornication, adultery, and I have seen many cases of the Crimes Against Nature law being enforced.

Ultra leftist Comrade Ellie Kinnaird (D) is the idiot that tried to get the Crimes against nature law overturned because she says it is a tool for LEO's to unfairly prosecute homosexuals and lesbians. It figures that you libertarians would side with her.

81 posted on 10/11/2002 3:29:54 PM PDT by FF578
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
I'm sure Whirlpool and Maytag are breathing a lot easier now.They'd have to start making washboards again for Alabama.
82 posted on 10/11/2002 3:31:48 PM PDT by HP8753
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wondervixen
Does this mean the electric chair is constitutional down there again?

We now give you a choise of methods. Progress huh...

"And will you profane Me among My people… killing people who should not die, and keeping people alive who should not live…?" Ezek. 13:19

Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. Eccl. 8:11

Now if we can only speed up the process... grrrr

83 posted on 10/11/2002 3:32:11 PM PDT by LowOiL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: FF578
What is so amusing is that libertarians really think that if they are going to be raided for breaking a law that it is going to be a single LEO knocking on the door.

More likely it is going to be a trained tactical team with Flashbangs, AR-15s in Full Tactical gear.


A trained tactical team to take down one guy getting a hummer?

Holy flerking snit! No wonder North Carolina is in so much trouble!
84 posted on 10/11/2002 3:38:07 PM PDT by flyervet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: FF578
I am aware of what Ellie Kinnaird has to say - I've heard her speak on the subject myself. I'm also aware of how the law functions - and you make it sound like a far more pervasive and uniform application than it has been in an exceedingly long time. Those cases you refer to have - to my knowledge - entailed rather exceptional circumstances of which you've yet failed to describe any situation that does not conform. I've stated the particular sorts of cases where one sees these charges arise, and unless you state some alternate scenario I'll assume that you're referring to the same.

The State of North Carolina has not made any sort of concerted effort in a very long time to prevent people from having sex out of wedlock. If some random local chief of police has decided to do so then that's news to me. People having sex in public locations or in exchange for payment are altogether different situations from those that I believe are under discussion here.
85 posted on 10/11/2002 3:39:04 PM PDT by AntiGuv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: flyervet
I was referring to drug raids.

Libertarians always talk a big talk, but never have any action behind that talk.

86 posted on 10/11/2002 3:43:08 PM PDT by FF578
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: FF578
What do drug raids have to do with a consensual, private sex acts?

Just so you know, you don't have to be a Libertarian to think that police have better things to do than haunt dark roads in search of horny teenagers.
87 posted on 10/11/2002 3:47:48 PM PDT by flyervet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: flyervet
dura lex sed lex
88 posted on 10/11/2002 3:52:58 PM PDT by FF578
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: FF578
What a convenient excuse. Who wants to track down murderers when there's an unmarried couple in Burlington engaged in oral sex? Why stop a bank robbery in progress when some guy in Winston-Salem is getting his wick waxed? And hey, let's face it, catching adulterers in flagrante dilecto is sooooo much more fun than catching terrorists.

Bad cop. No donut.
89 posted on 10/11/2002 4:02:05 PM PDT by flyervet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: FeliciaCat
Arizona has a long-standing law that fobids possession of more than 3 dildos in a home. I haven't yet been able to find out who the hell proposed that or what their logic was.
90 posted on 10/11/2002 4:14:34 PM PDT by Britton J Wingfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord
By what authority does the government have to tell me or anyone else how I can stimulate my genitals? In private.

Well, OSHA has a lot to say about repetitive-motion injuries.

91 posted on 10/11/2002 4:16:23 PM PDT by Britton J Wingfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
Outlawing the Hildebeasts Ajax 2000 vibrating broom
would have thrown a anti-climatic kink in her getaround.

92 posted on 10/11/2002 4:21:04 PM PDT by hosepipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FF578
The Crimes against nature law only applies to unmarried couples.

If you had come into my bedroom to arrest me for getting a bj from my girlfriend, you would have left in a bag.

93 posted on 10/11/2002 4:23:11 PM PDT by Britton J Wingfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: FF578
I prefer the Crimes against nature charge.

Just out of curiousity, what is unnatural about a twenty year old male and female having sex?

94 posted on 10/11/2002 4:34:14 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord
Uhm, you should probably keep your threats to yourself...especially since the LEO is in YOUR state!
95 posted on 10/11/2002 4:35:19 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: FF578
So, let me get this straight...if I go to a courthouse and tell the state that I am getting married then it is natural to have sex, but if I don't go to the courthouse and get married, it's unnatural. Interesting.
96 posted on 10/11/2002 4:36:25 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: FF578
So, let me get this straight...if I go to a courthouse and tell the state that I am getting married then it is natural to have sex, but if I don't go to the courthouse and get married, it's unnatural. Interesting.
97 posted on 10/11/2002 4:36:28 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Lowelljr; FeliciaCat
Take it easy on her buddy. She is from Southern Kalifornia and moved to NYC...she's bound to be a little bit different than the rest of us in fly over country. We're simply to unsophisticated to understand what these fancy people do.
98 posted on 10/11/2002 4:39:48 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: FF578
There are a lot of people who agree with Libertarians but don't vote that way because they don't want to give their vote to the Demoncats.
99 posted on 10/11/2002 4:42:19 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: FF578
You would charge two twenty year olds who were "parking" with a felony? Geez, I bet the drive-in theatre generation is glad you weren't around then!
100 posted on 10/11/2002 4:45:14 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 221-222 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson