Don Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Supreme Court Rejects Appeal on Ban on Sex Toy Sale Tue Feb 22,11:48 AM ET By James Vicini WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) 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 (news - web sites), 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 like ... vibrators, dildos, anal beads and artificial vaginas." But a U.S. appeals court based in Atlanta upheld the law by a 2-1 vote. The appeals court said it agreed with Alabama that the law exercised time-honored use of state police power to restrict the sale of sex. It rejected the ACLU's argument that the constitutional right to privacy covered the commercial sale of sex toys. Alabama Attorney General Troy King opposed the ACLU's appeal. "This case involves conduct that is both public and commercial -- the sale of sexual devices to the general public in commercial retail shopping centers" and at in-house Tupperware-style parties, he said. King said the law respected "the distinction between public commercial conduct and purely private behavior." He said, "It ... stays out of people's bedrooms." The justices rejected the appeal without any comment or recorded dissent. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Land of the free? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOTCB Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 (edited) Land of the free? So we are supposed to take that literally? So I can just leave my office, go rob the bank and it will be perfectly ok correct? There are no rules in Canada? Your posts show me while Im glad Im not affiliated with any political party. As for this ban, hey, I have no opinion on it, there are all kinds of crazy rules EVERYWHERE, thats what I have concluded. Edited February 23, 2005 by NoNHLTalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizDevil30 Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Alabamans is that right? People from Alabama need not fear, they just have to shop for sex toys on the internet. Those silly southerners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted February 23, 2005 Author Share Posted February 23, 2005 N-NHL-T: Well, back in university philosophy class we discussed what "freedom" meant. Our definition was: "The ability to do as you please so long as you are not infringing on the rights of others". For example, I'm not free to punch you in the head, because I'm infringing on your rights. However, I am free to jump up and down, because that action does not infringe on anyone elses rights. America is supposedly the beacon of freedom, an example for the rest of the world. But there are cases, such as this one here, where I just don't understand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek21 Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Are you saying that Canada is superior? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowdyFan42 Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Apparently this is a "beat up on Don" thread. Would it have gone differently had someone else posted the article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swede Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 haha... cool... wonder what the reason behind the ban is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swede Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 .... and.... how do you get caught!?!?!! next season: CSI, Alabama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizDevil30 Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Well Swede, it says it's a crime to sell them, not buy them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted February 23, 2005 Author Share Posted February 23, 2005 (edited) Are you saying that Canada is superior? I don't think I mentioned Canada. This was a theoretical question. How do you reconcile "most free country in the world" and "not allowed to sell a vibrator"? Edited February 23, 2005 by Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizDevil30 Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Are you saying that Canada is superior? I don't think I mentioned Canada. This was a theoretical question. How do you reconcile "most free country in the world" and "not allowed to sell a vibrator"? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It's called state's rights. In this country each state has the right to set it's own rules. Until, that is, the Feds set up national ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOTCB Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Apparently this is a "beat up on Don" thread. Would it have gone differently had someone else posted the article? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Beat up Don thread? Who posted the article and made that "Land Of the Free?" comment first? And I'm sure that comment was made to praise the U$A correct? Please. No system is perfect Don...NONE...and expect some shots at Canada if you are gonna take shots at the United States....and i never ever think that this country is perfect, far from it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek21 Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Are you saying that Canada is superior? I don't think I mentioned Canada. This was a theoretical question. How do you reconcile "most free country in the world" and "not allowed to sell a vibrator"? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It is what it is. America stands for a lot of good things. Freedom of choice, religion and expression are part of that. So, if you want to say that banning sex toys crosses the line, fine. But you have to keep in mind that every state has rules and regulations on things. There is something called censorship and I believe that applies here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Land of the free? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes Don, Land of the Free. If the people of Alabama think selling sex toys is immoral, then let them vote on it. Down there (well, down here), people are still deeply religious and they view sex toys as an Anti-Christian thing. You must find it scary but there are people out there that still pray, go to church, look to God for guidance, and think sex toys are an immoral thing. They still exist out there. Now, this is a STATE law, along with Georgia and TX. It's not a National Law. So if you are SO unhappy with not being able to use sex toys, you can just move to another state. Some people find this as a drawback to Federalism, but the fact that different states have different governments is a good thing. So to answer your rhetorical question, Yes, this is very much a land of the free and this article helps prove that point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swede Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 if they don't like it... don't use it... i can (if I stretch a bit) understand banning topless on the beaches and so on... I cannot see how anyone can tell everybody else how to live like this case... oh, and seperation of church and state maybe tk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 (edited) I cannot see how anyone can tell everybody else how to live like this case... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The article only talks about selling these toys, it says nothing about not being able to use them oh, and seperation of church and state maybe tk? I personally think a law banning sex toys is stupid and bogus, but I understand why a state like Alabama would pass such a law. It's called Tolerance... Edited February 23, 2005 by TK421 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swede Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 It's called Tolerance... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> of whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammyk Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Now, this is a STATE law, along with Georgia and TX. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't think any such law exists in Texas. Sex shops advertise on radio stations here all the time. I would imagine they sell sex toys. Or did you mean something else when you mentioned Texas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Now, this is a STATE law, along with Georgia and TX. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't think any such law exists in Texas. Sex shops advertise on radio stations here all the time. I would imagine they sell sex toys. Or did you mean something else when you mentioned Texas? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> From the article: Georgia and Texas are the only other states that restrict the distribution of sexual devices, according to the court record in the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 It's called Tolerance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyNice Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Seriously people, what do you expect from Alabama? They still have segregation written into their state Constitution. If the law made it a crime to use sex toys in the privacy of your own home that would be one thing, but it doesn't (as far as I can tell). While I think the law is totally stupid I know they have a right to pass and enforce it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 if they don't like it... don't use it... i can (if I stretch a bit) understand banning topless on the beaches and so on... I cannot see how anyone can tell everybody else how to live like this case...oh, and seperation of church and state maybe tk? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Freedom also means those people are free to choose to abide by church principles if they want to. If seperation of church and state meant the two could never agree on anything it would be madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheeps Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 In Don's fairness he never said ANYTHING about Canada. We need to stop assuming everything he says about America being bad means he is also is saying Canada is better. He isn't saying that. Maybe the "Land of the free" comment went a little far - as TK pointed out, 47 out of 50 states allow sex toys, so it's not like states that don't allow sex toys are the majority. I think it is kind of silly to ban sex toys. But then again I'd never move to Alabama. Never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsSheeps Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 So, selling sex toys is bad, but pornography is still ok with them (so long as its good ol' religiously-sanctioned porn)? I sometimes think Alabama was created to make the rest of the southern states seem less severe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts