Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Supreme Court legalizes homosexuality!

In 2003. I know that this is old news, but I don't think that many people realize that the case that struck down sodomy statutes also recognized homosexual relationships as being valid and on par with heterosexual ones, even if formal marriage is still illegal places. I didn't know about it either until I came across the case and read some of it. The language is beautiful, and it's something that almost makes you want to cry. Here's some of what I'm talking about:

"John Geddes Lawrence v. Texas, June 6 2003, Justice Kennedy giving the opinion of the court:

"To say that the issue in Bowers[a previous case that upheld anti-homosexual legislation] was simply the right to engage in certain sexual conduct demeans the claim the individual put forward, just as it would demean a married couple were it to be said marriage is simply about the right to have sexual intercourse. The laws involved in bowers and here are, to be sure, statutes that purport to do no more than prohibit a particular sexual act. Their penalties and purposes, though, have more far-reaching consequences, touching upon the most private human conduct, sexual behavior, and in the most private of places, the home. The statutes do seek to control a personal relationship that, whether or not entitled to formal recognition in the law, is within the liberty of persons to choose without being punished as criminals.
...
It suffices for us to acknowledge that adults may choose to enter upon this relationship in the confines of their homes and their own private lives and still retain their dignity as free persons. When sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring. The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to make this choice.
...

Bowers was not correct when it was decided, and it is not correct today. It ought not to remain binding precedent. Bowers v. Hardwick should be and now is overruled.
...

the case does involve two adults who, with full and mutual consent from each other, engaged in sexual practices common to a homosexual lifestyle. The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives. The State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime. Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government. "It is a promise of the Constitution that there is a realm of personal liberty which the government may not enter."

...

The Texas statute furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual. ....
The judgement of the Court of Appeals for the Texas Fourteenth District is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. It is so ordered."

No comments: