Mier's religious views

Frank Cross crossf at mail.utexas.edu
Wed Oct 5 12:32:30 PDT 2005


I'm pretty sure David's right, here, and it also applies to Lawrence.  The 
majority of Texans do not want homosexual sodomy criminalized.  There was 
just no pressure to repeal the statute, which was unenforced yet supported 
by a powerful religious right political interest group.  In fact, the dirty 
little secret of the USSC is that it has only rarely protected individual 
rights that were unpopular ones.  There are a few cases, but not many.


At 02:07 PM 10/5/2005, DavidEBernstein at aol.com wrote:
>By all accounts, didn't the "people of Connecticut", i.e., a majority 
>thereof, want the law repealed, but they couldn't overcome the entrenched 
>political power of the (local) Catholic Church?  If so, didn't the Court 
>protect the people from a "corrupt" legislature (in the "class 
>legislation" sense), and from the power of the Catholic Church?  If so, 
>the decision may still be wrong as a matter of constitutional law, because 
>the Court may not have authority to protect individual rights against 
>archaic, unpopular, and oppressive laws supported and sustained by a 
>religious faction.  But that's a lot different than the phony populist 
>argument.
>
>In a message dated 10/5/2005 2:57:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
>nebraskalawprof at yahoo.com writes:
>I think Griswold was wrongly decided, not because I am religiously opposed 
>to contraception (I am not), but because the Court merely imposed its 
>policy choices on the people of Connecticut. Griswold, Eisenstadt, Roe, 
>Casey, Lochner, and Lawrence are all illegitimate decisons in my opinion.
>
>
>David E. Bernstein
>Visiting Professor
>University of Michigan School of Law
>Professor
>George Mason University School of Law
>http://mason.gmu.edu/~dbernste
>_______________________________________________
>To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
>http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>
>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as 
>private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are 
>posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or 
>wrongly) forward the messages to others.

**********************************************************

Frank Cross
McCombs School of Business
The University of Texas at Austin
1 University Station B6000
Austin, TX 78712-1178
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20051005/b8f18a9b/attachment.htm


More information about the Conlawprof mailing list