Saturday, June 28, 2003
The Supreme Court found Texas' sodomy laws unconstitutional the other day.
Good for them. I've tried to let this one sink in a bit before posting. I've always thought sodomy laws were silly anachronisms, there to be tolerated while not being applied until someone got around to removing them. So when the court decided and I heard an outcry from some sectors on the right against the decision, I tried to give some of the arguments a chance before passing judgement. Would we go from laws on sodomy to laws of unintended consequences? What do we have to fear from this decision?
Not much it seems to me. Some of the hand-wringing over this has reminded me of why I'm a "neo" conservative, and not a "long-time" or "paleo." I've heard a lot of the talk that used to keep me away from the "conservative" label in the past.
I should say that I'm still willing to listen and keep an open mind as to what the deeper consequences of the decision are, but right now, this is what it seems to me: This one is a victory for human dignity, privacy, protection of the individual's Rights against the tyranny of the majority, separation of Church and State and the furtherance of laws that require enforcability and a basis in pragmatic reality (that is, one must show a compelling state interest to limit human freedom, rather than trying to parse God or Nature's "intent") - all good "conservative" values. If it leads us down the road to same-sex "civil-unions" then so be it. Let society legislate as necessary for the needs of society and its people as they are and as they show their needs to be.
