I'm certainly not going to mourn the demise of sodomy laws, which
I've long thought were quite outrageous. But I'm wondering about the
boundaries of the majority's logic, and in particular how it relates to the
right to assisted suicide rejected in Glucksberg. Wouldn't a right to
decide how to die be as important to one's "dignity as [a] free person[]" as
the right to build sexual relationships?
I realize that there are stronger arguments for why the government
may properly burden or even prohibit the exercise of that right; but
Glucksberg held that the right really isn't protected by anything more than
a rational basis test, relying largely on the "only traditional rights"
rationale that Lawrence seems to pretty decisively reject. Is this still
sound post-Lawrence?
Eugene
