Georgia vs Hardwick
root
Dallas (Tx) city hall at 9:30 pm concerning the recent
supreme court decision in the case of Georgia vs Hardwick.
This decision has the potential of being one of the most
destructive is the loss of personal freedoms in the history
of this great nation! If this decision is allowed to stand,
it could easily set precidence and allow the curtailing and
loss of _more_ personal freedoms.
This decision effects EVERYONE, not just a chosen few who
partake of a particular life-style. As it stands now, if you
live in Georgia, and you and your mate enjoy making love in
other than the conventional "missionary" position, YOU ARE
CONSIDERED A CRIMINAL! And, the local authorities are now
given the license to actually come into your home and arrest
you both.
Isn't it enough that the state and federal laws cover almost
every aspect of our daily lives with out comming into our
bedrooms as well? THIS MUST NOT BE TOLLERATED!
Organize rallys and letter writing campaigns in your area.
Standup and be heard. The voice of the people must prevale
in this effort.
See you in jail ;-)
Scotty
...ihnp4!killer!ozdaltx!root
DISCLAIMER:
"This system is mine, so this really isn't necessary!"
Jean Marie Diaz
>This decision effects EVERYONE, not just a chosen few who
>partake of a particular life-style. As it stands now, if you
>live in Georgia, and you and your mate enjoy making love in
>other than the conventional "missionary" position, YOU ARE
>CONSIDERED A CRIMINAL! And, the local authorities are now
>given the license to actually come into your home and arrest
>you both.
This is not the only piece of flamage that I've seen on the net
claiming that the Georgia sodomy law applies to both homo- and
heterosexuals. However, I read an article in the Boston Globe which
said that the law only applied to oral/genital contact BETWEEN MEMBERS
OF THE SAME SEX.
Could someone please confirm this? If true, it seems that much of the
hysteria coming from straights is highly exaggerated.
--
AMBAR
"I need something to change your mind...."
Henry Mensch
>
>This is not the only piece of flamage that I've seen on the net
>claiming that the Georgia sodomy law applies to both homo- and
>heterosexuals. However, I read an article in the Boston Globe which
>said that the law only applied to oral/genital contact BETWEEN MEMBERS
>OF THE SAME SEX.
The Georgia law applies to everyone without regard to sex or sexual
orientation. The Supreme Court decision deals particularly with
homosexuals; they chose not to consider similar acts among
heterosexual couples now. See the editorial in today's (8 July '86)
*Boston Globe* for more.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Henry Mensch | Technical Writer | MIT/Project Athena
he...@athena.mit.edu ..!mit-eddie!mit-athena!henry
gor...@cae780.uucp
>claiming that the Georgia sodomy law applies to both homo- and
>heterosexuals. However, I read an article in the Boston Globe which
>said that the law only applied to oral/genital contact BETWEEN MEMBERS
>OF THE SAME SEX.
>
>Could someone please confirm this? If true, it seems that much of the
>hysteria coming from straights is highly exaggerated.
Right. As long as it's just "them", and not "us", "we" have nothing to
fear...
Of course, all the Supreme Court did say is that there is no Constitutional
Right to oral/genital or genital/anal contact. That's not too surprising
either, is it? The implications may be greater than that, but the actual
decision isn't more than that.
FROM: Brian G. Gordon, CAE Systems Division of Tektronix, Inc.
UUCP: tektronix!cae780!gordon
{ihnp4, decvax!decwrl}!amdcad!cae780!gordon
{hplabs, resonex, qubix, leadsv, decwrl}!cae780!gordon
USNAIL: 5302 Betsy Ross Drive/#58137, Santa Clara, CA 95052-8137
AT&T: (408)748-4817 [direct] (408)727-1234 [switchboard]
Valerie Polichar
>said that the law only applied to oral/genital contact BETWEEN MEMBERS
>If true, it seems that much of the
>hysteria coming from straights is highly exaggerated.
>
No, no! At least some straights are enraged because certain human rights
are being infriged upon. Whether or not we may personally exercise those
rights is moot; we still consider them equally discriminatory and awful!
We believe these rights *should not be controlled by the state*.
(Gee, I /hope/ I'm speaking for more than just me.)
Valerie
--
Valerie Polichar sdcsvax!net1!valerie net1!val...@SDCSVAX.UCSD.EDU
This is a fake signature. If it were a real signature, you would have
fled, terror-striken, from your terminal.
Kee Hinckley
> said that the law only applied to oral/genital contact BETWEEN MEMBERS
> OF THE SAME SEX.
>
> Could someone please confirm this? If true, it seems that much of the
> hysteria coming from straights is highly exaggerated.
The LAW applies to both. The COURT restricted its ruling to homosexuals and
explictly left open the question whether a state can restrict heterosexual
sodomy. Where they get off with such blatent discrimination I do not know.
-kee
--
Mail is welcome... ...{yale,uw-beaver,decvax!wanginst}!apollo!nazgul
Apollo Computer, Chelmsford MA. (617) 256-6600 x7587
There's so many different worlds, so many different suns
And we have just one world, but we live in different ones.
Dire Straits - "Brothers in Arms"
Pete Zakel
The law as written can be applied to hetero- OR homo-sexuals. The Georgia
DA stated that the law would only be applied to homosexuals. The Supreme
Court only said the law was constitutional as applies to homosexuals. The
majority opinion specifically stated that they were not commenting on the
laws constitutionality as applies to heterosexuals.
So . . . what? Since the law is on the books, if Georgia and the Supreme
Court change their opinion in the future the law COULD be applied to
hetero-sexuals. And even if the law only applies to homo-sexuals IT IS
STILL A DANGEROUS LAW! Especially because the law can be used to hassle
a group of otherwise law-abiding Americans based on their sexual orientation.
If homosexuals can't have oral or anal intercourse, WHAT'S LEFT?
--
-Pete Zakel (..!{hplabs,amd,pyramid,ihnp4}!pesnta!valid!pete)
Davidsen
Perhaps now that states have the right to control what we do in the
bedroom (or wherever your favorite recreational area may be) we may see
notes in job postings indicating what sodemy laws are in effect. I can
see it all now:
"East Armpit has a theater which shows films both Friday and Saturday
night, has professional wrestling every month live, and has a good book
rack at the drugstore for the literary types. There are no state,
county, or local sodemy laws. Equal opportunity employes m/f/h/q/p/t"
Or in other parts of the country laws prohibiting unmarried persons
from sharing lodging might be passed, or laws on what positions may be
used, limiting not only what touches what, but how. "You got a bad back,
kid? Tough! We saw her on top, that's a felony in this town, pervert!"
With the middle of the country passing sodomy and pornography laws,
and the coasts (NY, CA, etc) passing laws against homosexual
persecution and discrimination, the next civil war may be the middle
against the coasts. I hope I'm kidding, but the liberals are willing to
let people practice chastity, while the fundamentalists (at least the
most visible kind) seem to justify violence because it's "God's will".
Where else do arsonists who burn planned parenthood offices (not
clinics, offices) regard themselves as the "good guys".
If you consider that Lebanon was a modern country with a stable
economy only 30 years ago, can someone please convince me that issues
of religion can't tear apart a modern country?
I think that with the new Supreme Court this is not going to be the
land of the free anymore, I hope I'm wrong.
--
-bill davidsen
ihnp4!seismo!rochester!steinmetz!--\
\
unirot ------------->---> crdos1!davidsen
chinet ------/
sixhub ---------------------/ (davi...@ge-crd.ARPA)
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward"