Was the Us.supreme court right in making homosexual sex legal?
Free country isn't it?
I'm ready to strike down anyone who thinks they have a reason why it shouldn't be .
Though I don't know the specifics of the case, in general yes.
if the supreme court ruled the other way, then they wouldn't be doing their jobs.
if we're going to punish people for being born a certain way, like making it illegal to be homosexual, then what's next, making it impossible for mentally disabled persons to have kids, or even killing them so society doesn't have to deal with them?
also makes me glad rick santorum became a senator instead of a supreme court justice.
Of course they were right, and for more than just common sense reasons.
Well, to see this level of agreement is a little scary.
lol. Really, it's not an issue whether or not you agree with their lifestyle. It's whether or not you agree with their freedom to practice that lifestyle.
It reminds me of that famous quote made by Voltaire...
Don't you mean State of Texas Supreme Court?
Re: Re: US. Supreme Court
No. It was the US Supreme court. What they really said was that states can not make such private consensual activities illegal.
It will be interesting how long it takes for the don't ask/don't tell military policy in the U.S. to be challenged with this new ruling, also interesting to see the outcome and what Bush's public views are on it.
I think we all know Bush will take a religious standpoint and denounce the ruling on the basis of morality, whose morality one would ask though? Are gays IMMORAL because they LOVE another of the same SEX?
I think the ruling is fair, and their reasoning is certainly good: it is a definate breach of privacy. Having laws against what a person can do with another person they love is insanse.
::::(Explicit Content Warning)::::
Is anal sex against the law with a man and a woman? Then why should it be against the law for a man and a man?
I would like to know how many laws like this are being enforced, I'm sure there are many more that need removed.
You must ask yourself, why are people making such a big deal about this, though? Do you think even one 'couple' did not engage in homosexual activity because of the current law? Foolish to even have a law that is impossible to enforce.
Actually, in most states the law is regarding sodomy; man, woman, critter, don't matter.
It is interesting how many modern standards can trace their roots to the Bible. I wonder what argument an athiest would make against sodomy or homosexuality.
In some cities, it is still illegal: to spit in the street, to leave your horse untied, for a school teacher to be out past dark or to have sex, or to walk your pigs or sheep through town. Some of these laws are not really that old either. Up until the 1960s, white only drinking fountains could still be found in Portland Oregon. Of course, since the Grand Wizard of the KKK was also the head of the physics department at Oregon State University, well... need I say more? Of course, Oregon is slowly changing. The cities are pretty normal.
I used to know a web site with a list of laws like this. I will try to find it.
I would question the validity of these sites for this reason, on many of them there is this:
"The English language is not to be spoken."
"You must contact the police before entering the city in an automobile"
"Spitting is forbidden"
"It is forbidden to fish while sitting on a giraffe's neck."
"It is legal to protect naked in front of city hall as long as you are under seventeen years of age and have legal permits."
"Bees are not allowed to fly over the village or through any of Kriland's streets."
None of these are laws in Illinois.
Link: http://realpolice.net/dumb_laws.htm [Broken]
If there were laws against sodomy, don't you think a lot of porn stars would be put in prison?
First off - yes those are all laws in the state of Illinois.
Secondly - on your porn star comment - laws are selectively enforced. There is no law that states law-breakers must be saught out.
Interesting. I know that some laws like this are true. Also, the state does not typically regulate spitting on the street and such. These are usually under municipal codes. So, perhaps the claim was in error, but not completely false. Also, the court ruled on sodomy. This is the law on most books. Another state recently on the books with this was either Vermont or Maine. No doubt, almost nobody enforces such laws except places like Bushland.
Note: I am aware of some so called "urban legends", that I know for a fact are not urban legends. One web site dedicated to this subject makes at least several false claims. Interesting, how does one introduce such an example? It is an urban legend that the following story is an urban legend?
I've never met an officer that didn't speak english...
Born and raised in Illinois, these aren't laws. I work for IDOT and we always have a state cop out there on the interstate to enforce the speed limit, we are spitting all over the place, the cop has never stopped us or said hey, that's against the law.
But hey, you said they are laws so they must be You give me the exact location these laws are recorded in and I will believe you.
If we found out tomorrow that there was a "murderer gene", would you advocate the Supreme Court legalizing murder?
What about homosexual acts committed by those who weren't born a homosexual?
Being born a certain way, by itself, should not be grounds for legalization.
So there shouldn't be laws against stalking?
Or what about a man killing his wife if it was consensual?
I'm not buying this rationale.
I love my dad. I don't have sex with him.
You did NOT pay attention.
Those are laws in the State of illoines.
You need to understand that there is no ruling that states laws MUST be enforced. They are laws, but they are NOT enforced - however they could be.
Just because you have committed law-breaking activities and were not arrested doesn't mean they're not laws.
You sir need to go to your local government and look in the state law book and you will see these laws there.
Until then, don't claim you know what is and isn't a law when you have NOT even peaked once into the book containing laws.
No. It would force a change in the penal system for sure. Also, this is not a fair comparison since there is a victim here.
It is still a personal choice.
You are comparing consensual activities mostly with those which have a victim. Also, come on, consensual murder? There is still a victim. The question is not whether we view the activity as morally correct. The question is a right of privacy.
That's a good thing. However, if you and your dad are both consenting adults...as disgusting as the thought is [nothing about you personally but you know what I mean], it is surely no business of mine.
Separate names with a comma.