(CNN) -- The Supreme Court struck down a Texas ban on gay sex Thursday, ruling that the law was an unconstitutional violation of privacy.

The justices voted 6-3 in striking down the Texas law, saying it violated due process guarantees.

"The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court's majority. "The state cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime."

Gay rights advocates immediately hailed the decision, while religious conservatives condemned it. In a blistering dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia said the court "has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda."

"It is clear from this that the court has taken sides in the culture war, departing from its role in assuring, as neutral observer, that the democratic rules of engagement are observed," wrote Scalia, joined by Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Clarence Thomas.

The ruling stemmed from the 1998 arrest of two Houston men, John Geddes Lawrence and Tyron Garner, under a 28-year-old Texas law making same-sex intercourse a crime. The court found that law and others like it violated the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.

"It's an historic day for gay Americans," said Ruth Harlow of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, a gay-rights group representing the two Texas men. "I think Americans will be celebratory about this decision."

Lawrence told reporters Thursday that he and Garner were happy with the outcome, but "never chose to be public figures or to take on this fight."

"Not only does this ruling let us get on with our lives, but it opens the door for gay people all over the country to be treated equally," he said.

The ruling reverses a 1986 high court ruling upholding state anti-sodomy laws. Kennedy wrote that homosexuals have "the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government."

The case stemmed from the 1998 arrest of a gay Houston couple under a 28-year-old Texas law making it a crime to engage in same-sex intercourse. A Texas state appeals court found the law "advances a legitimate state interest, namely, preserving public morals."

Gay rights advocates argued the law legitimized discrimination against homosexuals in everyday life.

"This is a very strong ruling that we all, as individuals -- whether gay or straight -- have the liberty to choose who we'll love and how we'll do that in the privacy of our own homes," Harlow said.


Rev. Rob Shenck: Ruling is "an undermining of our concept of justice."
In 1986, the Supreme Court upheld the prosecution of two gay men under a Georgia anti-sodomy law in a 5-4 decision that focused on the right to privacy. In Thursday's ruling, Kennedy said that decision "was not correct when it was decided, and it is not correct today."

"The court is just catching up with American society, which has already recognized gay people's equal liberty, equal humanity," Harlow said. "And the court issued a very powerful decision itself recognizing that humanity."

But the ruling immediately drew fire from a spokesman for a religious conservative group, the National Clergy Council.

"The court has said today that morality -- matters of right and wrong behavior -- do not matter in the law," said the Rev. Rob Shenck, one of the group's founders. "That is an undermining of our concept of justice in this country."

The Texas case already has entered the national political debate, stirred by May comments from Sen. Rick Santorum, a member of the Senate's Republican leadership.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Santorum said if the justices overturned the Texas law, "then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery, you have the right to anything."

Santorum defended his remarks, but some fellow Republicans distanced themselves from them.

The majority opinion appears to cover similar laws in 12 other states and reverses a 1986 high court ruling upholding sodomy laws. Kennedy wrote that homosexuals have "the full right to engage in private conduct without government intervention."

Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer agreed with Kennedy in full. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor agreed with the outcome of the case but not all of Kennedy's rationale.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented.

"The court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda," Scalia wrote for the three, according to the AP. He took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench.

"The court has taken sides in the culture war," Scalia said, adding that he has "nothing against homosexuals."

The case is Lawrence and Garner v. Texas, case no. 02-0102).



---

Copyright 2003 CNN. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.

Sorry dude, your about 10 threads to late there!

We are discussing this here:

http://www.prince.org/msg...&tid=53409

CAMILLE4U said:

Thanks- glad ur informed!