wPuri sermonis amator
Politics and Pop Culture.

And occasionally informative, amusing, or bizzare non sequiturs.

Matt's in charge here, others can post.

wNews and Propaganda:
The Nation
The American Prospect
The Washington Post
Tom Paine
Independant Media Center
The Hamster
The Guardian (UK)
The Memory Hole
ABC's The Note
Common Dreams
BBC News
Al Jazeera

Matthew Yglesias
Kevin Drum
Daily Kos
Change For Missouri
Tom Tomorrow
Wil Wheaton
Politics, Law, Autism
Joshua Micah Marshall
Roger Ailes
William Gibson
Counterspin Central
Dave Barry
The Rittenhouse Review
Brad DeLong
Ted Barlow
Neal Pollack
Eric Alterman
The Bloviator
Official Dean Blog
Unofficial Dean Blog
Joe Conason
STL - Instead Of War
Gary Hart
Mark Kleiman
Jeanne d'Arc
Thomas Spencer
Decnavda's Dialectic
Billmon's Whiskey Bar
Adam Felber
Iraq Democracy Watch
Dear Raed
MaxSpeak, You Listen!
Dennis Kucinich
Donkey Rising
Daryl Cagle

Hollywood Stock Exchange
Box Office Prophets
Ain't It Cool News
Internet Movie Database
Rotten Tomatoes
Fetal Film Report
Superhero Hype
The Force

Andy Bell

Get Your War On
Mega Tokyo
Mac Hall
Penny Arcade
Boy Meets Boy
Sluggy Freelance
Something Positive

Democracy For America

wStuff to buy:
NBY First Amendment Shoppe
Perceval Press
Unofficial Dean Stuff
The Dean Mart

wReference & Miscellany:
U.S. State Department 2002 Human Rights Report
Environmental Scorecard
Merriam-Webster Online
Unofficial Paul Krugman Archive
Bill of Rights
The Javascript Source
Ari & I
Pigfucker for President
Electoral College Calculator
Dean Picture Archive
Tax Policy Center
Coalition Military Deaths
Internet Modern History Sourcebook


-- HOME --

This page is powered by Blogger. Why isn't yours?
wTuesday, April 22, 2003

A Challenge

Any of you got the guts to read the 52 page transcript of the oral arguments in Lawrence v. Texas?

Come on troops, show you're serious about this whole Gay Rights thing.

Update: I just did it. Because I kick ass. If you're reading it, Justice Scalia is the bigot asking most of the questions of the plaintiff, and Justice Breyer is the one tearing the State apart.
Rosenthal (DA, Harris County, TX): Texas has the right to set moral standards and can set bright line moral standards for its people. And in the setting of those moral standards, I believe that they can say that certain kinds of activity can exist and certain kinds of activity cannot exist.

Justice Breyer: Could they say, for example, it is against the law at the dinner table to tell really serious lies to your family?

Rosenthal: Yes, they can make that a law, but there would be no rational basis for the law.

Breyer: Oh, really. It's very immoral. I mean, I know there's certainly - it's certainly immoral to tell very serious harmful lies to your own family under certain circumstances and around the dinner table, some of the worst things can happen.


But - the - the - so Texas could go right in there and any kind of morality that they think is just immoral or bad, cheating, perhaps. What about rudeness, serious rudeness, et cetera?
(Now sometimes the other Justices interject, particularly Scalia defending Texas, so keep that in mind if the questions seem to be contradicting each other occasionally.)

posted by Matthew Carroll-Schmidt at 4:28 PM

Comments: Post a Comment