I'd imagine if they determine kissing was the transference mechanism of some new pandemic.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Question: Could a U.S. State outlaw kissing.
- Thread starter fantome profane
- Start date
I'd imagine if they determine kissing was the transference mechanism of some new pandemic.
The right to kiss would be an unenumerated right; an inferred right.
Per the recent Supreme Court decisions on gun carry rights and abortion, unenumerated rights are legitimate only when they're "deeply rooted in the nation's history and traditions" -- justice Samuel Alito. That is, unless they predate the 1868 14th amendment, upon whose principles most of our modern freedoms are based.
So you didn't mean anything actually in the Constitution?
epronovost
Well-Known Member
Well, by that standard, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were pretty much in conflict for most of the US existence then for women and non-white people didn't have the right to liberty, life and the pursuit of happiness most of the country's history.
As Stevicus pointed out, he law is whatever current public sentiment says it is. You want to criminalize criticism of the president, sequester Asians in ghettos, deny women &al the vote, enslave people, prohibit mixed marriages, criminalize dissent, imprison a demographic in concentration camps, outlaw homosexuality? No problem. We've done it before, we can do it again.
Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
Why not, it's already outlawed for women to flutter their eyelashes in Texas.
Truth in love
Well-Known Member
In theory yes. A state in the US may make pretty much any law it wants except those that are prohibited to it by the Constitution.
That said few if any voters would tolerate such a thing. The will of the people is a powerful force to contend with.
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
It's Texass, so I have to ask...seriously?
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I happen to hold the founding documents to be equally valid. Not just the Constitution by which all the documents are binded together under the Constitution.So you didn't mean anything actually in the Constitution?
Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
Speaking of strange laws, if they outlaw kissing, then this could be next: a’s Minister of Health, has banned the use of doggy style during intimate sex (herald.ng)
Not enshrined in the Constitution. Secular values, yes.
Not in the Constitution. it is in the Declaration of Independence.
According to the current Supreme Court, there seems to be a problem.
I doubt you would consider the Articles of Confederation to be equally valid. The Declaration of Independence preceded the Articles. The current Constitution was written to fix many of the problems with those Articles.
And somehow I am guessing you do not hold the Federalist Papers to be equally valid, even though they are the primary explanation of the original intent of the writers. If you did, the existence of a party system, let alone a two party system, would be anathema.
Let's say that SCOTUS continues its nascent trend
of over-turning non-enumerated rights when they
offend conservative Catholic values....
Kissing could possibly be made illegal by branding
it "sodomy". But it would occur in stages, with banning
it in cases of homosexuality, miscegenation, & out of
wedlock conduct.
They are a super-majority on the court, & may rule
by fiat if they unite. But even they aren't fully disconnected
from society. The more they impose their religion upon
the unwilling, the more social strife there will be. This
pressure would be a mitigating influence. So I don't
worry. But I do think a larger SCOTUS with the goal of
religious diversity is worth pursuing. It's time to eliminate
Judeo Christian domination.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
Actually the rules during the pandemic did effectively outlaw kissing anyone who doesn't live in your house. In some of the places where those laws were enforced that would be outlawing kissing, wouldn't it?
Has anyone else seen the film 'Cinema Paradiso'? The censorship of kissing is central to the film.
So all the fundies in office need do is expand the ban
from a public health reason to a moral reason, ie, sin.
Never saw it.
It sounds like one of them snooty ferrin "films".
No, the *rules* did not effectively outlaw kissing. The *recommendation* was to not given the possibility of transmitting the virus. Sort of like how there is a *recommendation* to use protection when having sex to prevent STD transmission.
The *laws* were about masking in public places. The *recommendations* were other things to reduce the risk of getting the disease.