Alabama. Backwards and frustrated.
Alternate headline? "Stupid Law Upheld by 11th Circuit Court of Appeals."
And shame on them.
The law in question is Alabama's statute which prohibits the sale of "sex toys" as part of their "Anti-Obscenity Enforcement Act" (see Section 13A-12-200.1 et seq. of the Code of Alabama, where it says, more exactly, it is "unlawful for any person to knowingly distribute, possess with intent to distribute, or offer or agree to distribute any....device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs for any thing of pecuniary value").
The law prevents the sale of such devices entirely. That's right. Not to minors, but to legal consenting adults in full possesion of the faculties, rights and privileges accorded them by law. No vibrators for you, Alabamanians. (Bizarrely, the Court asserts--despite there not being any specific statutory exemption--that the sale of "ordinary vibrators or body massagers" is allowed, as they are not "designed or marketed" primarily for the "stimulation of human genital organs." Sure they aren't. Sore muscles, you know.)
The ludicrous idea that the adult people of Alabama need to be protected from the sale of sex toys is laughable. I say this because the court itself noted that the "use, possession or gratuitous distribution" of sex toys is not proscribed. So, you can give out all the dildoes you like, just don't sell one.
Maybe it is the association of filthy money with the beautiful expression of human sexuality that the Alabama legislators find objectionable. It's Mammon, not Priapus, that they fear. Soon they will ban all commerce! (Note the deft application of reductio ad absurdum argumentation. Or is it?)
A law that seeks to prevent legal adults from engaging in non-harmful, consentual, private sexual behavior is patently offensive to freedom-loving civil libertarians like myself.
The Court's ridiculous opinion can be downloaded from their site. Law.com's reporting of the decision can be found here. The friends of liberty and the constitution? Here.
For those of you wondering more about the free expression, reproductive rights, and rights of sexual privacy issues that this case raises, don't worry--we'll be coming back to this case, I'm sure.
And shame on them.
The law in question is Alabama's statute which prohibits the sale of "sex toys" as part of their "Anti-Obscenity Enforcement Act" (see Section 13A-12-200.1 et seq. of the Code of Alabama, where it says, more exactly, it is "unlawful for any person to knowingly distribute, possess with intent to distribute, or offer or agree to distribute any....device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs for any thing of pecuniary value").
The law prevents the sale of such devices entirely. That's right. Not to minors, but to legal consenting adults in full possesion of the faculties, rights and privileges accorded them by law. No vibrators for you, Alabamanians. (Bizarrely, the Court asserts--despite there not being any specific statutory exemption--that the sale of "ordinary vibrators or body massagers" is allowed, as they are not "designed or marketed" primarily for the "stimulation of human genital organs." Sure they aren't. Sore muscles, you know.)
The ludicrous idea that the adult people of Alabama need to be protected from the sale of sex toys is laughable. I say this because the court itself noted that the "use, possession or gratuitous distribution" of sex toys is not proscribed. So, you can give out all the dildoes you like, just don't sell one.
Maybe it is the association of filthy money with the beautiful expression of human sexuality that the Alabama legislators find objectionable. It's Mammon, not Priapus, that they fear. Soon they will ban all commerce! (Note the deft application of reductio ad absurdum argumentation. Or is it?)
A law that seeks to prevent legal adults from engaging in non-harmful, consentual, private sexual behavior is patently offensive to freedom-loving civil libertarians like myself.
The Court's ridiculous opinion can be downloaded from their site. Law.com's reporting of the decision can be found here. The friends of liberty and the constitution? Here.
For those of you wondering more about the free expression, reproductive rights, and rights of sexual privacy issues that this case raises, don't worry--we'll be coming back to this case, I'm sure.
posted by The Malcontent at 2:09 PM
3 Comments:
I agree with the Alabama court. This sort of stuff should be free.
I believe that Texas has a similar law which has been upheld and sporadically enforced.
You can take my vibrator when you pry it out of my clammy, satisfied, hand.
Post a Comment
<< Home