Features

Mockery · #1

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...ourt_sodomy_dc

AChimp · #2

"Protecting public morals" from a private practice? What happened if a guy was caught doing his wife in the ass? It's good that they are getting rid of stupid laws like this.

VinceZeb · #3

The laws were stupid to begin with. If being a homosexual or praticipating in these acts is immoral, God will sort that out.

Drew Katsikas · #4

Agh! I can't believe we have three homophobes judging our country's laws. Goddamnit!

kellychaos · #5

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

:humptydance

Zhukov · #6

I dont understand Homophobes, Homos are easy to beat up.

Dole · #7

So are homophobes. You just wink (or wank) at them to distract them and then KNIFE THEM IN THE FACE.

mburbank · #8

Don't you call me a homophobe! I would NEVER do a guy!

El Blanco · #9

Oh, you say that now. But, last night after a few drinks, you were certainly open to suggestions.

kellychaos · #10

That ain't all that was open

mew barios · #11

aha :o another victory for my evil agenda. :O eat that morality!

VinceZeb · #12

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?

El Blanco · #13

Because the Bill of Rights applies to the States as well as the feds. The Constitution guarentees the right of privacy.

I think homosexuality is wrong, but having the government peer into our bedrooms is a lot worse.

Besides, do we really need politicians telling us what is moral?

VinceZeb · #14

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

El Blanco · #15

Its implied by the Fourth Ammendment.

mburbank · #16

I think the gaurantee of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of hapiness includes privacy.

If you have the right to inavde someones bedroom and keep them from pursuing a little consensual happiness that in way affects anyone else, how happy are your pursuits going to be, Mr. Liberatarian?

VinceZeb · #17

It doesnt include privacy. Under the Consitution, we have no right to privacy. It is a myth.

mburbank · #18

Huh. Much of the Supreme court seems to disagree with you there, even some of the fairly conservative Justices. I wonder why?

VinceZeb · #19

probably because they are trying to put emotion into the Constitution.

mburbank · #20

I have no idea what you mean by that.

kellychaos · #21

Quote:

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It's not implied. It's clearly stated that one's personal privacy cannot be violated without probable cause and a warrant that states the said probable cause. From where would this probable cause come? Second parties declaring "Those fellas are gay. Bust 'em!"? This is NOT stepping on state rights. The federal constitution supercedes the state constitution. The states can add to the federal constitution but they cannot take away from it.