The US Supreme Court heard arguments today regarding an appeal for two men who were jailed and fined for engaging in anal sex. Here's a link to an article on CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/26/scotus.sodomy.ap/index.html
Here's my favorite part:
Justice Stephen Breyer challenged Houston prosecutor Charles Rosenthal to justify why the state has any interest in peeping into the bedrooms of gay people.
"Why isn't that something the state has no business in, because it isn't hurting anybody?" Breyer asked.
The state has an interest in protecting marriage and family and promoting the birth of children, Rosenthal replied. "Texas can set bright line moral standards for its people."
So apparently fining homosexuals will encourage them to have sex with women and in doing so protect the institution of marriage and promote the bearing of children!!
Good to know, huh?
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/26/scotus.sodomy.ap/index.html
Here's my favorite part:
Justice Stephen Breyer challenged Houston prosecutor Charles Rosenthal to justify why the state has any interest in peeping into the bedrooms of gay people.
"Why isn't that something the state has no business in, because it isn't hurting anybody?" Breyer asked.
The state has an interest in protecting marriage and family and promoting the birth of children, Rosenthal replied. "Texas can set bright line moral standards for its people."
So apparently fining homosexuals will encourage them to have sex with women and in doing so protect the institution of marriage and promote the bearing of children!!
Good to know, huh?