Sharon's Muse.... Let's chat over coffee while I ponder some things
|
Sharon's Muse.... Let's chat over coffee while I ponder some things |
About Me
Name::Sharon Cullars
From::
My Meez 
Recent Entries
Archives
Personal
Interesting Sites
RAINE'S BLUES 
Now available at Loose-Id Watch trailer for Raine's Blues
GOLD MOUNTAIN 
Available at Loose-Id
AGAIN
Need Flashplayer to view. Give time to load.
TOOL & BAD BOYS Short, Short Ebooks My Artwork
My Merchandise Freelance Projects
blog posts, articles, web content, resumes, copywriting, proofreading
Read my business guides at Work.com
Read my profile on Air Station Savannah's pivotal Katrina rescues
Read my article on the Fair Trade system
Credits |
Tuesday, May 15, 2007  No Jack Rabbits for you... ...that is, if you live in Alabama, Texas and Georgia. Since the late 90's, certain draconian statutes have criminalized the use of sex toys in the privacy of bedrooms throughout the south. Talk about the long-arm reach of the law. What is so blatantly clear here as with many other "morality" laws is that these laws stem from ecumenical edicts, creating a morass of religious legalism fronting as secular regulations. This might seem amusing initially, but when explored fully, it becomes downright disturbing. Laws should be legislated to protect the rights and welfare of the citizenry as well as maintain the peace. How do laws that penalize what consenting adults do in their bedrooms promote the welfare of the state? Some Alabama pleasure store owners are fighting back and are asking the Supreme Court to throw out the state ban as an unconstitutional intrusion into the bedroom. A similar appeal came before the Supreme Court in 2005, but the court declined to hear the case. Lead plaintiff Sherri Williams said outside the Supreme Court before filing the appeal, "A person should have the right to make their own decision to explore their sexual boundaries outside what some government official says is moral." So far, circumstances haven't been looking too well for Williams and company; in February (ironically, on Valentine's Day), the 11th U. S. Circuit in Atlanta upheld its ban, stating that "the state's interest in preserving and promoting public morality provides a rational basis for the challenged statute." Preserving and promoting public morality; these words are rife with potential abuse. By what criteria do we measure private actions as being against public morality? And how do these acts actually destabilize public morality (given that the public do not have eyes into these bedrooms?) In this country where state and religion are supposedly separate, and where most official religious beliefs and doctrines are given equal weight, which religious texts and tenets underwrite these "moralistic" laws? As for the KJV biblicists who believe we are to literally interpret the scriptures, please point to the specific scripture(s) that prohibits the use of sexual enhancements? OK, let me simplify the question by eliminating other controversial variables - what particular scriptures prohibit the use of sexual enhancements between a married man and woman? If you ask me, some of these puritianical laws actually controvert biblical scripture, particularly those of the Song of Solomon. I'm pretty sure the lovers of the book would appreciate a good jack rabbit ("While the king sitteth at his table, my spikenard sendeth forth the smell thereof" - one has to wonder), oils ("because of the savour of thy good ointments thy name is as ointment poured forth"), and other goodies. Sometimes, even Christians have to have fun.
|
| Layout Design by Hajira | Thanks to:Getty Images • Blogspot • Blogskins • |
