The first measure, which was approved by voice vote, says anyone who
knowingly uses an innocent-sounding domain name to drive traffic to a sex
site could be fined and imprisoned for two to four years.
Luckily, this would not apply to me, since as Zeldman is fond of repeatedly
dive into mark already sounds vaguely homoerotic. Which
leads me to…
Slate: Supreme Court</p>
There are two kinds of homophobia, at least in Texas. The first is a
hatred of all things homosexual. That’s bad. The other involves a certain
fondness for gay people — an acceptance that they are A-OK, so long as they
don’t commit any of those sex acts they’re inclined toward. This sort of
Will & Grace ("gays are so cute, but don’t show me what they do in bed")
homophobia seems not only to be defensible according to the state of Texas;
it also appears to be the lynchpin of their argument in today’s long-awaited
gay sodomy case.
SodomyLaws.org says that 14 states have</p>
sodomy laws</a>. Some states (like
Texas) only ban
sodomy between homosexuals; others (like
Carolina</a>) ban it altogether. Many states lump it in with bestiality
(although Texas does not). North Carolina has banned sodomy
(it was punishable by death until 1868).
Anal sex can be a</p>
perfectly safe activity</a> as long as you take the necessary precautions.
SodomyLaws.org also has an extensive page on
the history of this</p>
landmark Lawrence case</a>, all the way back to 1998 when it started.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule in July.
I seen this and had to post it! sorry!