Euryleia
05-13-2008, 05:53 PM
In February, a federal appeals court struck down a Texas law that makes it a crime to promote or sell sex toys.
The Texas law dates back to the 1970s and makes it illegal to sell, advertise, give or lend obscene devices, defined as a device used primarily for sexual stimulation. Anyone in possession of six or more sexual devices is considered to be promoting them.
The state wrote in their brief that Texas has legitimate "morality based" reasons for the laws, which include "discouraging prurient interests in autonomous sex and the pursuit of sexual gratification unrelated to procreation."
"Whatever one might think or believe about the use of these devices," said an opinion written by Justice Thomas M. Reavley of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, "government interference with their personal and private use violates the Constitution."
The 2-1 opinion was based heavily on the U.S. Supreme Court's 2003 decision in Lawrence and Garner v. Texas, which struck down a Texas law prohibiting private consensual sex among people of the same sex.
That case established a broad constitutional right to sexual privacy and overturned sodomy laws across the country.
The Lawrence case didn't just say that gay sex couldn't be criminalized. It said that people have the right to engage in consensual intimate conduct in their home, free from government intrusion. It said that the fact that the State doesn't happen to like a particular kind of sex doesn't mean they have a right to ban it, or indeed to have any say in it at all.
But the Texas sex toy case, Reliable Consultants and PHE v. Texas, makes it clear that Lawrence has even broader implications than just gay rights. It has implications for everyone: sadomasochists, fetishists, swingers and any other sexual minority you can think of.
If you're any of those things... you now have a legal right to it, anywhere in the country. And that's pretty darned important for all those custody rights and housing rights and employment rights. It may wind up having implications for porn laws; if our right to sexual privacy means we can have vibrators, it should mean we have a right to dirty movies as well.
Of course, Texas could appeal to the US Supreme Court and make it all moot. Until then, shouldn't there be celebrations? What are your thoughts?
A couple of links:
The Austin American Statesman (http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/02/14/0214sextoys.html)
the-texas-dildo-massacre-or-reason-number-2767-why-gay-rights-matter-to-everyone (http://blog.blowfish.com/culture/the-texas-dildo-massacre-or-reason-number-2767-why-gay-rights-matter-to-everyone/569)
The Texas law dates back to the 1970s and makes it illegal to sell, advertise, give or lend obscene devices, defined as a device used primarily for sexual stimulation. Anyone in possession of six or more sexual devices is considered to be promoting them.
The state wrote in their brief that Texas has legitimate "morality based" reasons for the laws, which include "discouraging prurient interests in autonomous sex and the pursuit of sexual gratification unrelated to procreation."
"Whatever one might think or believe about the use of these devices," said an opinion written by Justice Thomas M. Reavley of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, "government interference with their personal and private use violates the Constitution."
The 2-1 opinion was based heavily on the U.S. Supreme Court's 2003 decision in Lawrence and Garner v. Texas, which struck down a Texas law prohibiting private consensual sex among people of the same sex.
That case established a broad constitutional right to sexual privacy and overturned sodomy laws across the country.
The Lawrence case didn't just say that gay sex couldn't be criminalized. It said that people have the right to engage in consensual intimate conduct in their home, free from government intrusion. It said that the fact that the State doesn't happen to like a particular kind of sex doesn't mean they have a right to ban it, or indeed to have any say in it at all.
But the Texas sex toy case, Reliable Consultants and PHE v. Texas, makes it clear that Lawrence has even broader implications than just gay rights. It has implications for everyone: sadomasochists, fetishists, swingers and any other sexual minority you can think of.
If you're any of those things... you now have a legal right to it, anywhere in the country. And that's pretty darned important for all those custody rights and housing rights and employment rights. It may wind up having implications for porn laws; if our right to sexual privacy means we can have vibrators, it should mean we have a right to dirty movies as well.
Of course, Texas could appeal to the US Supreme Court and make it all moot. Until then, shouldn't there be celebrations? What are your thoughts?
A couple of links:
The Austin American Statesman (http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/02/14/0214sextoys.html)
the-texas-dildo-massacre-or-reason-number-2767-why-gay-rights-matter-to-everyone (http://blog.blowfish.com/culture/the-texas-dildo-massacre-or-reason-number-2767-why-gay-rights-matter-to-everyone/569)