subjective: (Default)
[personal profile] subjective

u.s. supreme court strikes down texas sodomy law.

in related news, please note that scalia says he has nothing against homosexuals, but is quick to point out that the court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda. score.

who can tell me what this means for the sodomy laws in the other 12 states? i am also curious to know if things like polygamy & adultery are against the law & if so what the legal reasoning is.

(no subject)

Date: 2003-06-26 07:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] srl.livejournal.com
Most states criminalize bigamy and legislate that marriage is a contract between exactly two people. I'm not sure what the legal rationale is. I know that in order for Utah to become a state, they were required to pass laws against multiple marriage.

(no subject)

Date: 2003-06-26 08:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] easilyirritable.livejournal.com
Polygamy is illegal in every state. The only reason Utah became a state in 1894 was because they promised to outlaw polygamy. I think polygamy and adultery are illegal because they threaten the nuclear family unit, and as such are seen as detrimental to the moral character and well-being of society.

I can't imagine that the other anti-sodomy laws will have a legislative foot to stand on after this ruling. Six-to-three is pretty decisive, as far as I can tell, and I'm sure we'll see people butt-fucking on the steps of the Capitols in Birmingham, Salt Lake, Tallahassee, et al., in celebration. Well, I hope we don't actually see it, but you know what I mean.

(no subject)

Date: 2003-06-26 11:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jactitation.livejournal.com
Damn. I was hoping this was going to be a more lascivious entry.

(no subject)

Date: 2003-06-26 12:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] symptom.livejournal.com
oh happy day. i'm surprised how broad the final vote was.

this bothers me very much, however, in scalia's dissent: "What a massive disruption of the current social order, therefore, the overruling of Bowers entails. Not so the overruling of Roe, which would simply have restored the regime that existed for centuries before 1973, in which the permissibility of and restrictions upon abortion were determined legislatively State-by-State."

anyway, i would think that the anti-sodomy laws would become null & void now. i'm not positive, but i'm almost sure that the polygamy is against the law in all states (including utah, where tom green was arrested for not only bigamy but also using these 'wives' to garner more welfare checks). i think one of the reasons polygamy became illegal was because of the tax issue -- how many wives or husbands or dependants can you claim? this law (& perhaps adultery laws, if they exist) seem to be rather slippery, based on perhaps a general disgust? i don't know. i've never heard that adultery is against the law, but i think it can be sited to justify divorce in some states.

Profile

subjective: (Default)
subjective

November 2006

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415 161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags