Sodomize away kids!

[AChimp]

Vinth would probably be the first person to start whining and bitching about how the government was prying into his affairs if privacy wasn't constitutionally protected.

[FartinMowler]

Vinces nickname in prison is "soap on a rope"

[punkgrrrlie10]

How would one have gathered evidence and prosecuted a case like that anyway?

Originally they could only prosecute homosexuals b/c they knew that that is the only way that they can be intimate. Don't forget, sodomy includes oral sex. Usually they would send cops undercover to gay bars and pick up on patrons, would take them back to a hotel and right before the nasty would read them their rights and cart them away. In this case, Texas v. Lawrence, the guys were having sex, and a neighbor said she saw them doing drugs or something and the cops busted in on them and arrested them. This particular case was based on equal protection b/c in Texas and in a few other states they only prohibited homosexual sodomy while allowing hetero. In the process of overruling those laws they overruled Bowers which had said that it wasn't illegal for states to outlaw sodomy altogether among all sexual preferences but if you read the opinion, you would see it revolved completely around homosexual sex b/c they knew that was the only thing that can be prosecuted. The privacy of a marital bedroom is one of the implied natural rights of citizens recognized since the forming of the constitution, whether it is written in or not. There is no right to be an athiest written into the constitution either but it is implied in freedom of religion. The Bill of Rights allows freedom of religion, not freedom FROM religion.

I'm glad you all think this is real cute. The Supreme Court may have struck down a law that I think is stupid in the first place, but they pissed all lover the Constitution in doing so.

Why do we even need states anymore if the federal govt is going to tell them what they can and cannot do?

Like all things, the state's rights are limited by the BASIC guarantees of the constitution settled by the bill of rights. If states were allowed to do whatever the hell they wanted, there would be no need for a federal constitution and GA. could suspend freedom of speech and religion and make everyone suscribe to the NAZI party as a central requirement for citizenship within that state.

Where is the right to privacy in the Constitution, if I may ask.

Again the case law interpreting the constituion becomes apart of what are considered natural rights of all American citizens. Just b/c the right is not explicitly mentioned does not mean it does not exist. Ie. no right to marry explicitly in the constition, so can states prohibit it? They may be able to restrict it by licensing requirements but they can't out and out prohibit it and states can't under the privileges and immunities clause deny recognition of marriages happening in other states.

It is a myth.

It's not a myth, it's case law which is the equivalent of codified law except it is much more difficult to overturn.

[VinceZeb]

Oh I'm sorry, I guess that I must have done that real bad thing, ya know... what it is it now...

Oh yeah, I HAVE READ THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION!

Forgive me.

[kahljorn]

I read the constitution once. The end.

[Protoclown]

homophobia is for fags

[AChimp]

Oh yeah, I HAVE READ THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION!

Vinth's Homework
Read the Constitution.

Reading: A+
Comprehension: F

Please see teacher after class. Must resume flash card lessons.

[ziggytrix]

We had to change the Constitution to give women the right to vote in America, too.

Sometimes people are wrong, and they admit it, and then they go about finding a way to repair the damage their mistakes have caused. That's a best case scenario. Most of the time people try to hide their mistakes or pass the blame to another.

It is a damned hard thing to admit when you're wrong. We've all got too much pride. It'll be the end of us, mark my words.

Not one god in any religion of which I can think at this moment condones hubris.

[kahljorn]

You should join my Religion, in which I am God, but I condone hubris. Mostly my own. At first I thought Hubris was some kind of ground cover, then I realized i was only half right.

[ziggytrix]

Yeah, I was really only thinking bout the ones that can say they've got a decent chunk of the world population following thier religion (Christianty, Judaism, Hindu, etc). You know, the ones folks take SERIOUSLY.

Not that I condone taking religion seriously.

[Helm]

Not one god in any religion of which I can think at this moment condones hubris.

Ancient greek polytheism. That's where the word Hubris comes from, originally. Partly roman trait as well. When you 'go too far', Hera sends the Heriniae after you (fuck you Zena!) which are demonic half female half bird things that bite at your genitals with their long pointy nasty beaks.

Kickass.

[VinceZeb]

Homophobia in the correct term really doesnt exist that much in america. Most people do not have a phobia or are afraid of gay people. It's most a moral issue with them. I think I have seen a case of homophobia once in my life, when I worked at an IHOP and this ugly beak nosed waitress made me bleach the table becuase a couple of supposedly gay guys ate their meals at that booth.

Now that's homophobia.

[mburbank]

A.) You are such a bad writer it boggles the mind.

B.) You don't know what case law is, let alone understand it's relationship to the constitution.

C.) Find the right to Marry in the constitution. Can states bar marriage?

D.) Did you read Punkgirl's post?

E.) You certainly don't have to agree with her, but since she's actively in law school you might at least try thinking about what she wrote. It's safe to assume she's read the constitution too.

[VinceZeb]

Johnny Cochran was "active in law school" at one time as well. So was Bill Clinton. Most liberals have their agenda passed becuase of courts, not becuase of the Consitutional rights.

[mburbank]

So you see the current Supreme court as being, what, Liberal?

You may not like Clinton or Cochran. I certainly don't like either one. But I imagine they could both answer fairly simple questions about the relationship of the Constitution, Case Law and precedent. Becuase they graduated from law School.

Answer the central question which wiill reveal your shoddy understanding of American Law and how it works.

Could a state outlaw marriage? If not, why not?

[VinceZeb]

A state could outlaw anything it wants as long as it doesnt go against the constitution.

So you are saying, in essence, if we outlawed animal/human marriages, we would be violating the rights of those groups?

[mburbank]

I'm not saying anything of the sort.

You however, are now on record as saying

"A state could outlaw anything it wants as long as it doesnt go against the constitution."

Unless you mean, 'outlaw anything until the supreme court overturned the state law' you are quite wrong. You don't know what precedent is, do you?

[VinceZeb]

I know that there is a thing called "state's rights" that is being destroyed in this country. Apparently you are ignorant to how this country was formed.

[mburbank]

"States rights" are plural. "Is" is singular.

You can be ignorant 'about', you can be ignorant 'regarding', but no one can be ignorant 'to how'. It is ignorant to say someone is 'ignorant to how'. You are ignorant.

AND you do not know what legal precedent is. Do you?

[FS]

Homophobia doesn't just manifest itself in actual, visible fear of homosexuals. Most of the time it's hostility towards them in fear of being seen as one of them.

[punkgrrrlie10]

Originally Posted by VinceZeb

A state could outlaw anything it wants as long as it doesnt go against the constitution.

So you are saying, in essence, if we outlawed animal/human marriages, we would be violating the rights of those groups?

animals can't consent in the normal sense of the word. Hiding behinds state's rights in the way you are putting it is fallacious. Can states outlaw wearing purple on sundays? Can states outlaw eating ice cream on tuesday nights? I don't see those enumerated anywhere in the constitution or bill of rights, so I guess states could outlaw them then? um, no b/c that would be a denial of freedom of expression and outlawing ice cream on tuesdays probably wouldn't serve any legitimate purpose and would restrict the freeflow of commerce, respectively...it would be interesting.

You are right in saying "A state could outlaw anything it wants as long as it doesnt go against the constitution". What you fail to realize is that a part of the constitution is how it's been interpreted over the years by precedents of the Supreme Court, one of which is the fundamental right to marry, conceive and have a family, none of which are enumerated in any amendment or in the text of the constitution. Another would be freedom of association, no where enumerated yet considered a fundamental right as established by the 1st amendment impliedly.

[ziggytrix]

Originally Posted by Helm

That's where the word Hubris comes from, originally. Partly roman trait as well. When you 'go too far', Hera sends the Heriniae after you (fuck you Zena!) which are demonic half female half bird things that bite at your genitals with their long pointy nasty beaks.

Just because you'd enjoy it, doesn't mean it was supposed to be a reward. :/

[Helm]

I know