Quote:
Originally posted by john_cramer
Guys, I think the issue is significantly more complex than that. Our fabric of laws is full of prohibitions on the behavior of consenting adults.
What about the most common form of prohibition of the sexual behavior of consenting adults, laws against prostitution? Such laws have been repeatedly upheld as being in the interest of public morals, health and welfare.
|
It can be argued that prostitution harms the participants (ie it is not a "victimless" crime). Therefore it doesn't qualify as "no negative effect".
The guy killing/eating the other guy again doesn't exactly qualify as "not harming" the participants.
Laws concerning property are also focused on protecting an individual's interests. I cannot do "whatever I want" and go destroy someone's stuff becuase it negatively effects them.
How does sodomy between consenting adults rise to any of these examples?