When I was in law school, I had a crazy professor named John Kramer. In the story below, the state of Alabama passed a law banning the sale of "sexual devices" which was being challenged in the Supreme Court as an invasion of privacy. There are many things I could say about this law, but I think a story about one of my law school professors says it all.
His name is John Kramer and he is possible now, certifiably insane. But a number of years ago, Mississippi tried to pass the same law banning the sale of sex aides. There was a town hall meeting in Mississippi where the law was being debated, so Professor Kramer decided to prove a point. Professor Kramer, who lives in New Orleans, drove to a local adult shop and bought the biggest dildo he could find... a two foot double-headed, think as your wrist dildo. He then drove across state lines and entered the town hall meeting, walked up to the front of the hall and produced the dildo from his bag... He then proceeded to whack the law's sponsor over the head with it and said, "See, I bought this is another state... I didn't buy it in Mississippi... But that didn't protect you, did it?... Your law can't stop this, now can it," and then walked out
Supreme Court Rejects Appeal on Ban on Sex Toy Sale
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Tuesday a constitutional challenge to an Alabama law that makes it a crime to sell sex toys.
The high court refused to hear an appeal by a group of individuals who regularly use sexual devices and by two vendors who argued the case raised important issues about the scope of the constitutional right to sexual privacy.
The law prohibited the distribution of "any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs." First-time violators can face a fine of up to $10,000 and as much as one year in jail.
The law, adopted in 1998, allowed the sale of ordinary vibrators and body massagers that are not designed or marketed primarily as sexual aids. It exempted sales of sexual devices "for a bona fide medical, scientific, educational, legislative, judicial or law enforcement purpose."
Georgia and Texas are the only other states that restrict the distribution of sexual devices, according to the court record in the case.
Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union, representing those who challenged the law, argued that private, consensual sexual conduct among adults is constitutionally protected and beyond the reach of government regulation.
They said the Supreme Court's decision in 2003 striking down a Texas sodomy law also created a fundamental, constitutional due process right to sexual privacy.
"The evidence shows that this case is not about novelty items, naughty toys or obscene matter. It is a case about human sexuality and extremely intimate acts," the attorneys said.
They said Alabama has never explained "why sales of performance enhancing drugs like Viagra, Cialis and Levitra and even ribbed condoms are not similarly prohibited."
The attorneys said the state did not contest the evidence that about 20 percent of all American women use a vibrator and at least 10 percent of sexually active adults use vibrators in their regular sex life.
A federal judge ruled against the state and found a constitutional right to use sexual devices. But a U.S. appeals court based in Atlanta upheld the law by a 2-1 vote.
(Full Story)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Dingo,
I bet everyone paid attention in Kramer's class.
You know, in Georgia they charged a woman a few years ago when they found her with a trunk full of stuff that's sold at parties for women. Sex stuff, and I don't remember exactly what, but I gather there was quite a variety.
But what I found so hilarious about this charge was that in was in the Atlanta area, and the Atlanta area is famous for its strip bars, not that we don't have them down here. It's more as if the lawmakers don't want the purity of their women violated. Or perhaps they only object to plastic?
Now, think of the fun you could have with bumperstickers addressing this hypocrisy.
I think they need a new Dukes of Hazard, but instead of moonshine, they can be running vibrators and french ticklers across state lines...
Post a Comment