Last edited: July 18, 2004

Court Has Put U.S. on Slippery Slope

The Times-News, July 24, 2003
Box 490, Hendersonville, NC 28792-0490
Fax: 828-692-2319

Consider a few things when you ponder the implications of the Supreme Courtís overturning of the Texas sodomy law. Sen. Rick Santorum was blasted in the media for raising the far-reaching legal implications of the case. Many people, including conservatives, applauded the case as a confirmation of personal privacy.

However, one of the central points of the case was the consensual nature of the sexual behavior. If consent is the defining attribute of a relationship, are consensual incest, polygamy, pedophilia and bestiality then acceptable? Think this line of reasoning is far-fetched or extreme? Please consider the following facts:

Current Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, as an attorney for the ACLU, lobbied to lower the age of consent for sexual acts to 12 years old.

During its annual convention in May, the American Psychiatric Association discussed the removal of pedophilia (and other paraphilias) from its diagnostic manuals.

Peter Singer, the eminent bioethicist at Princeton, argues that bestiality is perfectly acceptable; that animals can and do consent, and that consent need not be verbal.

Let me ask you a question. Do we truly want a society in which unlimited sexual expression is synonymous with American freedom?

óMark Rich, Hendersonville

[Home] [News] [Wackos] [USA]