Last edited: November 14, 2003


Three letters on Lawrence v. Texas

Philadelphia Inquirer, July 6, 2003
PO Box 8263, Philadelphia, PA 19101
Fax: 215-854-4483

Letter: Laws and religious beliefs

Although the June 27 editorial “Privacy preserved” hinted at the topic of legislating morality, all the commentary and news about the Supreme Court’s decision on sodomy laws overlooked a reason for more people to celebrate than just gays and lesbians.

This decision takes a solid step toward freeing people from burdens of laws that are based on certain religious beliefs. This move may somewhat lessen criticism of the United States for its hypocrisy in condemning other countries for their religious-based laws while this nation keeps so many of the same kind of laws on the books, and while prominent officials propose even more.

—John Jonik, Philadelphia

Letter: Sodomy is not victimless

In the 1980s and 1990s, scores of thousands of American homosexuals died from engaging in the same sexual acts that were recently legalized by the Supreme Court. So maybe there is a public health basis for anti-sodomy laws. And perhaps these acts are not victimless or intrinsically virtuous.

Further, if gay sex is a private matter, why have gay activists so stridently demanded that all taxpayers and health insurance premium payers subsidize billions of dollars of treatments for diseases caused by these private activities?

—Mark Oshinskie, Highland Park

Letter: Liberty for all

I applaud and celebrate the decision of the Supreme Court striking down the Texas sodomy laws (“Sodomy laws felled by court,” June 27). This is a great victory for the gay community.

Obviously the dissenters, Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, as well as the social conservatives and religious groups blinded by homophobia, misinterpret the homosexuals’ agenda, which is nothing more than demanding equality, justice and liberty for all.

—Monique Frugier, Ardmore,

[Home] [News] [Pennsylvania]