Last edited: February 06, 2005

Letters: Court Strikes Bans on Gay Sex

Los Angeles Times, June 29, 2003
Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA 90053
Fax: 213-237-7679 or 213-237-5319

Denouncing the 6-3 Supreme Court decision that did away with anti-sodomy laws in Texas and 12 other states, Justice Antonin Scalia claims the court has “taken sides in a culture war” (June 27). There is indeed a culture war.

On one side of the battlefield are those who would establish a conservative Christian theocracy in our secular nation. On the other side are those of us who believe we should enjoy personal, individual liberties consistent with our own religious beliefs without coercion from other religions.

Contrary to Scalia’s opinion, the government does not have the right to stick its nose into my bedroom.
—David E. Ross, Oak Park

The American people are greatly indebted to Justices Scalia, William H. Rehnquist and Clarence Thomas for their bigoted dissent in Lawrence and Garner vs. Texas. All of us can now authoritatively state, quoting these justices, that the Supreme Court “has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct”—that is, equal justice for homosexuals. Also, these justices are quite liberal in selecting and omitting their traditions—omitting, for instance, homosexuality in the founding tradition of Western civilization, the ancient Greeks.
—Ira Spiro, Los Angeles

In the Texas case, there were three dissenting justices. One was Justice Thomas. In his 1991 Senate Judiciary Committee nomination hearing, Thomas testified: “I will not provide the rope for my own lynching or for further humiliation. I am not going to engage in discussions, nor will I submit to roving questions of what goes on in the most intimate parts of my private life or the sanctity of my bedroom. These are the most intimate parts of my privacy, and they will remain just that, private.”
—Marco Fuentes, Solana Beach

[Home] [Editorials] [Lawrence v. Texas]