[kuma]

You know that was not the majority opinion. That was one justices opinion that refused to join the majority opinion. That is not what this overturn means at all. It was based on a mythical "right to privacy". All that specific passage states is search & seizure laws and due process.

If you were correct and it was based solely on the fact that in the Texas case it was unequal on sodomy laws that would be an entirely different matter. The Texas legislators could have decided whether or not they wanted to enact a different more equally binding law.

Instead they have been told they cannot effectively legislate anything that is done in privacy by a consenting adult. This can lead to many more things than sex as well. Tell me can Texas voters decide anything for themselves or must they always bend to the will of Judicial Activists.

Simply put you do not think We The People are fit to decide anything. Only those 9 justices can rule the land. Of course especially since it suits your agenda.

[DAnconia55]

You know that was not the majority opinion. That was one justices opinion that refused to join the majority opinion. That is not what this overturn means at all. It was based on a mythical "right to privacy".

Stopped clocks and all. I told you what was Constitutional and correct for the court to do. Doesn't matter that they accidently did right.

And there IS A right to privacy. See Amendments 9 and 10.

[DAnconia55]

Of course especially since it suits your agenda.

Yeah! Yeah! You sure told me. Now hang on whilst I run out and bugger some hairy dude. LOL.