Monday, August 02, 2004
np: son volt - straightaways
well, i come back from taking a break and we're at it again.
this story is a most interesting development in alabama.
A federal appeals court Wednesday upheld a 1998 state law banning the sale of sex toys in Alabama, ruling the Constitution doesn't include a right to sexual privacy.
In a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the state has a right to police the sale of devices including electronic vibrators and other products meant to stimulate the sex organs...
meh?
didn't we take care of this last year with the supreme court's ruling in the texas sodomy laws case? the court of appeals has, literally, run legitimate business persons out of business, as well as inhibited the ability of people to fairly obtain items they have a right to purchase for their own private use.
since the ACLU is fighting this case, i'm sure an appeal to the supreme court will be drafted, but now i seriously wonder if the court will even hear the case? it does seem to fly directly in the face of precedent, but i wouldn't be surprised to find the supreme court a little less likely to take on sex toys as a cause versus consensual intercourse between two adults. i could be entirely wrong and i hope i am, but at this point in 2004, after watching the supreme court refuse to hear the 'under god' pledge case (which left me sorely disappointed), nothing would surprise me.
thanks to the general who is always right on these kinds of things. if you don't read his site, you are missing out on one of the sharpest satirical sites on the sinister side of the blogosphere.
