The conservative worldnetdaily.com website earlier this week ran
a
news story on the sodomy law case now before the U.S. Supreme
Court, and it provides some insights into the minds of those on the
anti-gay right. According to the report:
The U.S. Supreme Court could soon grant homosexual activists their own "Roe v. Wade" decision, a constitutional guarantee that would undermine scores of laws that protect the traditional family, according to some opponents. At issue is a challenge to a Texas law barring "homosexual conduct," or sodomy, but some legal minds involved in the case believe the stakes are much higher. ...
This would be a "huge trump card" for homosexual activists, asserts Texas attorney Kelly Shackleford, an "atomic bomb that they could carry around to attack any law that does not treat homosexuality on an equal basis with heterosexuality."
Aside from the nightmare of equality under the law for gays and
straights (which is an overly optimistic scenario, in any event,
given that the court tends to limit its ruling as narrowly as
possible), what else do those on the other side of the culture wars
fear?
Shackleford argues that the court essentially could elevate sexual activity to a right equal to free speech, thus undermining laws against incest and prostitution.
But such slippery slope sophistry just isn't convincing anymore.
Even more revealing, however, is this remark:
"If you asked people, is there a right to engage in sodomy in the U.S. Constitution, 100 out of 100 would probably start laughing," [Shackleford] said. "So this would be seen as extreme judicial activism. Five people would be ruling our country rather than the elected people in our state legislatures."
I think this statement shows just how wrong the religious right
is. Most people would be shocked to learn that private, consensual,
non-commercial lovemaking isn't a basic right in the land of the
free. The fact that rigid social conservatives think that defending
sodomy laws is a winning issue for them bodes well for their
continuing decline into irrelevance.
--Stephen H. Miller