Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I don't think you're simple, and I understand the impulse to neutrality, but I think it's a false neutrality. There is no neutral position here. Either the state can arrest you for having sex with a consenting adult in your own bedroom, or it can't. If you think it should be able to do this, you can reach that conclusion in different ways, but all will have a moral component.
I wasn't trying to be unfair. I was trying to say that if you're going to take the side of Texas in the Lawrence case, you can do it because you dislikes gays. That's a moral choice. Or you can do it because you think that the Constitution should be construed in accord with the original views of the framers. But that's also a moral choice.
|
I'm not taking the side of Texas, as I've said several times now. ANd I'm not talking about neutrality with this particular case. Rather, I'm trying to have my cake and eat it too, right result in this case but still protecting me from the tryranny of the judiciary.
