covers Header

Wednesday, June 25, 2003

Slinking Towards Sodom

Click to Send Postcard


Jesus Justices, let it go
Remember you can Just say No
Fucking Ass Can Be Quite Fun
Once You Start, You’re Never Done.

It’s just a simple choice, and legitimate too
You won’t give a damn if it’s just not for you
But shrill objections seem to say
The fear runs deep, who’s straight; who’s gay


Privacy means something,
With a woman or a man
In your choice of porno movies
Or a pubic on your can
Deep in the Hole of Texas
Or now is it really Bumfuck?
You can sodomize your neighbor
In your bedroom, or your dump truck!
RELATED LINKS

Full U.S. Supreme Court Decision, Lawrence et al. v. Texas, June 26, 2003

RELATED ANNOY.COM EDITORIALS

Child Pawn
by Clinton Fein
June 23, 2003

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Go To Hell
The Law of Guns and Canon

by Clinton Fein
May 31, 2002

Telling, Asking and Lying
The Official Military Policy

by Clinton Fein
January 1, 2000

Simply Fits!!!
Dirty Palms and Badly Played Hands!

by Clinton Fein
April 15, 1999

Matthew Shepard: A Call to Arms
by Clinton Fein
October 1, 1998

RELATED ANNOY.COM COVERS

Miss Pedophilia
April 1, 2002

Not in My Miltary
November 07, 2001

RELATED POSTCARDS

Slinking Towards Sodom
so.do.my
Absolut Sellout
Uh-Oh!
Top or Bottom
Not Natural
Behind Every King…
Fuck Homophobia

NOISE

Countless judicial decisions and legislative enactments have relied on the ancient proposition that a governing majority's belief that certain sexual behavior is "immoral and unacceptable" constitutes a rational basis for regulation...

State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers' validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today's decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding...

Today's opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct...

So imbued is the Court with the law profession's anti-anti-homosexual culture, that it is seemingly unaware that the attitudes of that culture are not obviously "mainstream"; that in most States what the Court calls "discrimination" against those who engage in homosexual acts is perfectly legal...
Justice Antonin Scalia, with whom The Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Clarence Thomas join, dissenting, Lawrence et al. v. Texas, June 26, 2003


I "can find [neither in the Bill of Rights nor any other part of the Constitution a] general right of privacy," ibid., or as the Court terms it today, the "liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions
Justice Clarence Thomas, dissenting, Lawrence et al. v. Texas, June 26, 2003


Other objectors offered a kind of prude's critique, complaining than it was a travesty to bring all that graphic talk about Thomas's alleged references to sex with animals, and porn star Long Dong Silver, and pubic hairs on Coke cans into our living rooms, where children and old ladies could be watching.
William Boot, The Clarence Thomas Hearings, Columbia Journalism Review, January/February 1992


Earlier in the day, as Thomas sought to put his outrage into words, centuries of racial oppression flooded his mind. An old friend had called him the night before to talk about the hearings. Although the friend disagreed with Thomas' politics, he abhorred what was happening to him. The two black men agreed that his adversaries were capitalizing on and perpetuating the vicious stereotype--responsible for so much racial violence--of a sexually voracious black man who needed to be stopped.

As he paced in Danforth's Senate office before going out to meet the committee, Thomas latched onto a thought and a phrase. "This is a lynching," he told the senator. "This is a high-tech lynching." He made some notes before leaving for the Caucus Room.
Andrew Peyton Thomas, Clarence Thomas: A Biography, Prolog


Reporters sneaking into my garage to examine books I read. Reporters and interest groups swarming over divorce papers, looking for dirt. Unnamed people starting preposterous and damaging rumors. Calls all over the country specifically requesting dirt. This is not American. This is Kafka-esque. It has got to stop. It must stop for the benefit of future nominees, and our country. Enough is enough.

I am not going to allow myself to be further humiliated in order to be confirmed. I am here specifically to respond to allegations of sex harassment in the workplace. I am not here to be further humiliated by this committee, or anyone else, or to put my private life on display for a prurient interest or other reasons. I will not allow this committee or anyone else to probe into my private life. This is not what America is all about. . . .
Clarence Thomas, The Clarence Thomas Confirmation Hearings, Hearings Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Second Congress, October 11, 1991


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.
Clarence Thomas, The Clarence Thomas Confirmation Hearings, Hearings Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Second Congress, October 11, 1991


This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It is a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, as far as I am concerned, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity-blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that, unless you kow-tow to an old order this is what will happen to you, you will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate, rather than hung from a tree.
Clarence Thomas, The Clarence Thomas Confirmation Hearings, Hearings Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Second Congress, October 11, 1991


From Newsweek, March 9, 2001:

[Justice Antonin] Scalia is regarded as the embodiment of the Catholic conservatives…While he is not a member of Opus Dei, his wife Maureen has attended Opus Dei’s spiritual functions…[while their son], Father Paul Scalia, helped convert Clarence Thomas to Catholicism four years ago. Last month, Thomas gave a fiery speech to the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think-tank, to an audience full of Bush Administration officials. In the speech Thomas praised Pope John Paul II for taking unpopular stands.

And to think that Thomas Jefferson and John Adams opposed the presence of the relatively benign Jesuit order in our land of laws if not of God. President Bush has said that Scalia and Thomas are the models for the sort of justices that he would like to appoint in his term of office.
Gore Vidal, The Meaning of Timothy McVeigh, Vanity Fair Magazine, September, 2001


To say that the issue in Bowers was simply the right to engage in certain sexual conduct demeans the claim the individual put forward, just as it would demean a married couple were it said that marriage is just about the right to have sexual intercourse. Although the laws involved in Bowers and here purport to do not more than prohibit a particular sexual act, their penalties and purposes have more far-reaching consequences, touching upon the most private human conduct, sexual behavior, and in the most private of places, the home. They seek to control a personal relationship that, whether or not entitled to formal recognition in the law, is within the liberty of persons to choose without being punished as criminals. The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to choose to enter upon relationships in the confines of their homes and their own private lives and still retain their dignity as free persons.
Justice Kennedy, Lawrence et al. v. Texas, June 26, 2003


[Writing about W.B. Yeats] He can hardly have had any conception of just how thoroughly things would fall apart as the center failed to hold in the last third of this century. He can hardly have foreseen that passionate intensity, uncoupled from morality, would shred the fabric of Western culture. The rough beast of decadence, a long time in gestation, having reached its maturity in the last three decades, now sends us slouching towards our new home, not Bethlehem but Gomorrah.
Robert Bork, U.S. Federal Court judge, author of Slouching Toward Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline, 1996

 
search      

© Copyright 1997-2017 ApolloMedia Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
annoy.com Site Information