« Rotations | Main | Sokal Hoax at 20 »
Monday, January 01, 2018
Thanks for Having Me, and New Year's Resolutions
*Tap, Tap* Is this thing on? It's probably been... well, an eon (in cyberyears) since I was last blogging. Thanks for having me back and for the warm Prawfsblawg welcome. Here's my Jan. 1st resolution. Do any of you have new year's resolutions about scholarship?
Posted by Miriam A. Cherry on January 1, 2018 at 02:55 PM in Blogging | Permalink
Comments
J--
Don't forget, the court didn't just legalize anal sex, but also you can wear a gay pride shirt to school. Whereas if you wear a pot-smoker pride shirt to school you can be expelled (Morse v. Frederick). Obviously if anal sex were dangerous (led to AIDS), you couldn't wear a shirt promoting it, like how you can't wear a shirt promoting drug use--because drug use, unlike anal sex, is dangerous. Anal sex is legal, therefore it isn't dangerous, therefore it can't lead to AIDS.
Posted by: Zzz | Jan 4, 2018 8:38:54 AM
J--
Don't understand why this is so hard to understand. We can outlaw things that are dangerous, like drugs. AIDS is dangerous. We can't outlaw anal sex. So anal sex isn't dangerous. So anal sex must not lead to AIDS, if we can't outlaw it.
Whenever the court legalizes something, they're saying that it's not dangerous, i.e. it doesn't lead to AIDS. So legalizing anal sex is the exact same thing as saying it doesn't lead to AIDS. So legalizing anal sex is the same thing as ruling that anal sex doesn't lead to AIDS. Lawrence ruled that anal sex was legal, so Lawrence ruled that anal sex doesn't lead to AIDS.
Posted by: Y | Jan 4, 2018 7:26:12 AM
john--
do you really think that Lawrence has kept more people out of jail than legalizing pot instead would have? You don't think it's a little odd that the supreme court legalized the thing that it's easy to do in private and not be arrested for, rather than the thing that probably thousands of people are arrested for doing (or selling) every year?
Posted by: Chemo | Jan 3, 2018 2:17:28 PM
john--
so if your son starts having anal sex with Milo and your daughter starts smoking pot, you expect your son to live longer? That's why you want anal sex to be legal, but not pot?
Posted by: Fanz | Jan 3, 2018 2:06:55 PM
If this is how you get your jollies, you should probably seek professional help.
Posted by: john | Jan 3, 2018 1:52:05 PM
J--
Why do you think it's safe for gay people to have anal sex but not smoke marijuana? Obviously you're more likely to die from smoking marijuana than having anal sex. But if anal sex led to AIDS, you'd be more likely to die from anal sex then marijuana (and then anal sex would be outlawed but marijuana would be legal--but it's the other way). So anal sex must not lead to AIDS--since it's legal--which makes it safer than smoking marijuana.
Posted by: UW | Jan 3, 2018 10:00:34 AM
J--
Why do you think anal sex has been legal for 14 years, but marijuana remains illegal? Obviously anal sex is safe but marijuana is not. But if anal sex could lead to AIDS it wouldn't be safe, so it must not lead to AIDS because it is safe--because anal sex is legal and all legal activities must be safe since unsafe activities can be outlawed.
Posted by: T | Jan 3, 2018 9:56:38 AM
J--
You would agree that if anal sex led to AIDS that anal sex could be outlawed, right? But anal sex can't be outlawed, therefore the only possible conclusion is that it doesn't lead to AIDS, since it could be outlawed if it did lead to AIDS.
When the court legalizes something, they're saying that it's safe (since dangerous activities can be outlawed). Since AIDS isn't safe, but anal sex is, then anal sex must not lead to AIDS.
Posted by: S | Jan 3, 2018 9:52:53 AM
J--
You agree that marijuana can be outlawed because it leads to lung cancer. If marijuana can be outlawed because it leads to lung cancer, then anal sex can be outlawed because it leads to AIDS. But anal sex can't be outlawed, which means it doesn't lead to AIDS. That's the only even remotely rational interpretation of Lawrence. If anal sex led to AIDS, then anal sex would present a clear and present danger (the contraction of AIDS and potential death from AIDS) and therefore could be outlawed--like fighting words, that also present a clear and present danger. But anal sex can't be outlawed, which means it presents no clear and present danger, which means it doesn't lead to AIDS.
Posted by: Roe | Jan 3, 2018 9:19:21 AM
J--
"If the "clear and present-danger" test could not be satisfied in the more extreme circumstances of those cases, it would seem to follow that the test cannot be met here."
-Landmark Communications, Inc. v. Virginia, 1978
Activity can only be prohibited if it creates a "clear and present danger". Anal sex can't be outlawed (Lawrence) so it must not create a clear and present danger--like the possible transmission of AIDS.
Clothing can be outlawed (Littlefield v. Forney Independent School District), therefore it must represent a clear and present danger far greater than any presented by anal sex.
Posted by: Q | Jan 3, 2018 4:30:27 AM
J--
You would agree that "hate speech isn't free speech", right? Because "hate speech kills" (Charlotteville). But you wold also agree that anal sex is protected under the fourteenth amendment, because anal sex doens't kill---like hate speech. Well AIDS does kill (Freddie Mercury). So if anal sex doesn't kill, but AIDS does, then anal sex must not lead to AIDS (Lawrence v. Texas).
Posted by: N | Jan 3, 2018 3:25:35 AM
J--
According to Justice Stevens, the second amendment doesn't protect the right to keep and bear arms because, "Firearms may be used to kill another person." (Justice Stevens' dissent in McDonald v. Chicago). But he joined the majority in Lawrence v. Texas to legalize anal sex. Therefore he must be believe that anal sex doesn't kill people, like guns do. Therefore Lawrence's holding is that anal sex doesn't kill people. Since AIDS does kill people, anal sex must not lead to AIDS.
Posted by: M | Jan 3, 2018 2:55:01 AM
J--
Why do you think anal sex is legal federally (Lawrence), but marijuana isn't? Is it because there are more gay people than marijuana-smokers among lobbyists? Of course not. It's because you're far more likely to die from smoking marijuana than from having anal sex--i.e, its more dangerous. Since AIDS kills, the only logical conclusion is that if anal sex doesn't kill, it must be because it doesn't lead to AIDS--which does kill.
Posted by: L | Jan 3, 2018 2:49:27 AM
J--
The reason drugs like marijuana are banned is because they lead to death. Things can be banned if they lead to death. Since anal sex can't be banned (Lawrence), it must be because it doesn't lead to death. Since AIDS kills, just like drugs, anal sex must not lead to AIDS if anal sex doesn't kill (since it can't be banned).
Posted by: K | Jan 3, 2018 2:41:23 AM
"If anal sex doesn't lead to AIDS (Lawrence) then neither does clothing."
This is my favorite troll comment ever. It starts with such a bizarre interpretation of Lawrence, and then devolves even FURTHER into non-sequitur from there. I'm very impressed.
Posted by: J | Jan 2, 2018 1:42:52 PM
If professors have a right to do scholarship of any issue they want, surely their students have the right to wear whatever they want. Free speech must be for all, not just for you professors, otherwise people will hate you as elitists and vote for Trump just to spite you.
Posted by: Shapiro | Jan 2, 2018 11:30:59 AM
I definitely think since we proved gay marriage was part of the original intent of equal protection, that we can surely prove that allowing gay people to wear what they want was the original intent of the first amendment.
Posted by: Obergefell | Jan 2, 2018 11:28:52 AM
If free speech includes holding up signs, then it surely includes having the same words on your clothing.
Posted by: Hands up, don't tell me what to wear | Jan 2, 2018 11:26:52 AM
If this blog actually believes in free speech, they must believe people of all ages have the right to wear what they want.
Posted by: Milo | Jan 2, 2018 11:25:05 AM
If anal sex doesn't lead to AIDS (Lawrence) then neither does clothing.
Posted by: Barnette | Jan 2, 2018 11:23:30 AM
Getting school uniforms banned. We all know that Roe and Lawrence are built on the foundation of autonomy, which means we can wear what we want.
Posted by: Barnette | Jan 2, 2018 11:22:53 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.