home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: misc.legal
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!uchinews!ellis!thf2
- From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
- Subject: Re: Supreme Court and Homosexuality
- Message-ID: <1992Nov22.223446.4225@midway.uchicago.edu>
- Sender: news@uchinews.uchicago.edu (News System)
- Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
- Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
- References: <24067@galaxy.ucr.edu>
- Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 22:34:46 GMT
- Lines: 15
-
- In article <24067@galaxy.ucr.edu> judson@watserv.ucr.edu writes:
- >You obviously did not read my post clearly enough. I said that I was in
- >agreement with the Supreme Court in the case in question because the Appellee
- >argued that homosexuality was a fundamental right which could not be abridged.
- >They rightly ruled that they could find no where in the Constitution where it
- >stated that the right to homosexuality could not be abridged. And, if I were
- >deciding the case, I would give the same decision if asked the same question.
-
- Here's a hypothetical.
-
- Can Georgia constitutionally ban heterosexual sex?
- --
- ted frank | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu
- standard disclaimers | void where prohibited
- the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
-