Sexual privacy under fire?

A new South Carolina bill, if passed, would make the sale of sex toys illegal in the state, and punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

What shocks me, though, is that apparently this very simple and unbelievable violation of personal privacy rights is nothing new. According to the AP story, Alabama, Georgia, Texas, and Mississippi already have various sex toy bans in place.

Excuse my disgust, but how the fuck is this NOT legislating morality? I can't IMAGINE a justifiable argument to support the ban of sex toys. I haven't done the necessary research, but I'm guessing the bill's author, a REPUBLICAN state legislator by the name of Ralph Davenport, is one of those crazy fucks who also thinks public schools should be punished for distributing condoms to underage high schoolers.

The article does make reference to the last Supreme Court case which dealt with obscenity, Miller v. California, in which the court finally defined "obscene" as that which is completely without any "literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" or is completely "prurient" in nature.

As various critics have noted, there are two serious problems with this premise. First, there is no clear standard by which peddlers or citizens could determine beforehand whether or not any given material is actually obscene. The standard given is absolutely subjective, and so then the danger becomes the ability of the law to punish citizens for breaking a law that they didn't know they were breaking.

The second problem is that the court never established anything WRONG with PRURIENCE. To say that something is obscene only because it is expressly and only sexual is the equivalent of a condemnation of ALL SEX. What would the courts have us do, reject sexual pleasure in all its forms? That seems to be the implication here, and it certainly seems to be the spirit of the legislation offered by Mr. Davenport. And that is a method of legislating morality, and that, many would contend (including myself) is unconstitutional.

Why the hell can't the Christians just be happy with their own prudish natures? Why is it that they can't stand to see ANYONE having a good time? I think the pro-choice maxim of "keep your laws off my body" is quite appropriate here.