But that doesn't seem to be your argument. You say it's a social question. You
want the states to legislate peaceful social interactions? First comes sex,
then come bridge rules and party etiquette? C'mon.
I'm not saying those things SHOULD be regulated. What I'm saying is that IF those things are to be regulated, it should be done by the states, not by the Supreme Court. There does not need to be a single national standard for everything. In fact, there should NOT be -- that's the whole point of Federalism, as I know you know. My objection is that the Supreme Court decided, wrongly IMO, that the constitution guarantees the right to do whatever you want to in your bedroom (I defy anybody to find a place where the Constitution says this), and further, that whatever, if any, regulation takes place there should be done by state legislatures, who can be replaced by the voters if they make a decision the voters don't agree with. The Supremes cannot be replaced; they have absolute power; and therefore should use that power very cautiously and not to be a super legislature for all 50 states.
As to whether the states can legislate bridge rules, well, I don't particularly want them to since I play bridge, but where in the Constitution does it prohibit the states from doing that? |
