Appeals Court Rules 2257 Constitutional

tickler · 2009-02-24, 12:53 AM

Idiots!

I'm still trying to digest their reasons, but I-D-I-O-T-S

"We are being asked to invalidate a law in its entirety based on a worst-case scenario that, to our knowledge, has never occurred, that may never come to pass and that has not been shown to involve a materially significant number of people," Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote.
http://business.avn.com/articles/34501.html

The ruling(.pdf)
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions...9a0063p-06.pdf

I'm liking this guy who has a more detailed post.

This is a classic sexphobic move: sexually unconventional people, because they transgress certain normative sexual boundaries, are assumed to have no boundaries whatsoever.
http://polyperversity.blogspot.com/

2009-02-24, 12:53 AM	#1
tickler If there is nobody out there, that's a lot of real estate going to waste! Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 2,177	Appeals Court Rules 2257 Constitutional Idiots! I'm still trying to digest their reasons, but I-D-I-O-T-S "We are being asked to invalidate a law in its entirety based on a worst-case scenario that, to our knowledge, has never occurred, that may never come to pass and that has not been shown to involve a materially significant number of people," Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote. http://business.avn.com/articles/34501.html The ruling(.pdf) http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions...9a0063p-06.pdf I'm liking this guy who has a more detailed post. This is a classic sexphobic move: sexually unconventional people, because they transgress certain normative sexual boundaries, are assumed to have no boundaries whatsoever. http://polyperversity.blogspot.com/ __________________ Latina Twins, Solo, NN, Hardcore Latin Teen Cash