+ 1-888-787-5890  
   + 1-302-351-4405  
 
 
 
 

Essay/Term paper: Court case number 15: bowers v. hardwick (june 30, 1986)

Essay, term paper, research paper:  Politics

Free essays available online are good but they will not follow the guidelines of your particular writing assignment. If you need a custom term paper on Politics: Court Case Number 15: Bowers V. Hardwick (June 30, 1986), you can hire a professional writer here to write you a high quality authentic essay. While free essays can be traced by Turnitin (plagiarism detection program), our custom written essays will pass any plagiarism test. Our writing service will save you time and grade.



Court Case Number 15: Bowers v. Hardwick (June 30, 1986)


In August of 1982, Michael Hardwick was charged with violating the
Georgia statute criminalizing sodomy by committing that act with another adult
male in the bedroom of Hardwick's home. Hardwick then brought suit in the
Federal District Court, therefore challenging the constitutionality of the
statute as it criminalized sodomy. Hardwick asserted that he was a practicing
homosexual, that the Georgia statute, as administered by the defendants, placed
him in imminent danger of arrest and that the statute for several reasons
violates the Federal Constitution.
I oppose the Court of Appeals decision that Michael Hardwick's complaint
was dismissed by evidence seen through rights readily identifiable in the
Constitution's text involved much more that the imposition of the Justices' own
choice of values on the States and the Federal Government, the Court sought to
identify the nature of rights for heightened judicial protection. Such landmark
court decisions as Palko v. Connecticut stated this category includes those
fundamental liberties that are "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,"
such that "neither liberty nor justice would exist if any fundamental liberties
were sacrificed." In Moore v. East Cleveland, fundamental liberties are
characterized as those liberties that are "deeply rooted in this Nation's
history and tradition."
Proscriptions against a fundamental right to homosexuals to engage in
acts of consensual sodomy have ancient roots. Sodomy was a criminal offense at
common law and was forbidden by the laws of the original thirteen States when
they ratified the Bill of Rights. In 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was
ratified, all but five of the thirty-seven States in the Union had criminal
sodomy laws. In fact, until 1961, all fifty States and the District of Columbia
continue to provide criminal penalties for sodomy performed in private and
between consenting adults.
As his honorable Justice John Paul Stevens opinion stated, sodomy was
condemned as an odious and sinful type of behavior during the formative period
of the common law. That condemnation was equally damning for heterosexual and
homosexual sodomy. Moreover, it provided no special exemption for married
couples. The license to cohabit and to produce legitimate offspring simply did
not include any permission to engage in sexual conduct that was considered a "
crime against nature."
One the more prominent features of Bowers v. Hardwick involved the
Georgia statute, "the presumed belief of a majority of the electorate in Georgia
that homosexual sodomy is immoral and unacceptable." The Georgia electorate
enacted a law that presumably reflects the belief that all sodomy is immoral and
unacceptable. Unless the Court is prepared to conclude that such a law is
constitutional, it may not rely on the work product of the Georgia Legislature
to support its holding decision. For the Georgia statute does not single out
homosexuals as a separate class meriting special disfavored treatment.
I strongly believe that according to the Bill of Rights and the Georgia
statute, they both state in similar contexts that homosexuals and heterosexuals
are treated both equally and that as long as the Bill of Rights states that
sodomy is a criminal offense at common law and the Georgia statute reiterates
the theme that all sodomy; whether committed by a heterosexual or homosexual
couple, is immoral and unacceptable, my opinion shall stand against the final
decision made by Justice John Paul Stevens, Justices' Brennan, and Marshall.

 

Other sample model essays:

Business and Government Agencies The primary focus of my topic is three fold, first if a high ranking official from a firm were to become the Director of an agency and his former company i...
Canada's Copyright Law Canada's copyright law is one of our hardest laws to enforce. The reason the police have so much trouble enforcing this law, is due to technology. This law is...
Capital Punishment The Debate over the merits of capital punishment has endured for years, and continues to be an extremely indecisive and complicated issue. Adversaries of capital puni...
Capital Punishment: Injustice of Society Looking out for the state of the public's satisfaction in the scheme of capital sentencing does not constitute serving justice. Today's sys...
Capital Punishment: Does the End Justify the Means? If... he has committed murder, he must die. In this case, there is no substitute that will satisfy the legal requirements of legal justic...
Capital Punishment: Pro Capital Punishment deters murder, and is just Retribution Capital punishment, is the execution of criminals by the state, for committing crimes, regarded so heinous, t...
Capital Punishment: For Have you been wondering where all our tax dollars are going to these days? A large amount of it is going towards maintaining murderers, rapists and thieves, and ...
Capital Punishment Deters murder, and Is Just Retribution Joe Smith January 3,1997 Capital punishment, is the execution of criminals by the state, for committing crim...
Capital Punishment Throughout history, statistics have proven that Capital Punishment or otherwise known as the death penalty, has been an effective deterrent of major crime. Capital ...
Capital Punishment: For and Against Thesis One: In principle a case can be made on moral grounds both supporting and opposing capital punishment. Thesis two: Concretely and in practice, compel...
Experience with Dream Essay - Reliable and great customer service. Quality of work - High quality of work.
Browns Mills, New Jersey, United States
Dream Essay - Very reliable and great customer service. Encourage other to try their service. Writer 91463 - Provided a well written Annotated Bibliography with great deal of detail per the rubric.
Browns Mills, New Jersey, United States
it is always perfect
Frederick, Maryland, United States
The experience with Dream Essay is stress free. Service is excellent and forms various forms of communication all help with customer service. Dream Essay is customer oriented. Writer 17663 is absolutely excellent. This writer provides the highest quality of work possible.
Browns Mills, New Jersey, United States
Only competent & proven writers
Original writing — no plagiarism
Our papers are never resold or reused, period
Satisfaction guarantee — free unlimited revisions
Client-friendly money back guarantee
Total confidentiality & privacy
Guaranteed deadlines
Live Chat & 24/7 customer support
All academic and professional subjects
All difficulty levels
12pt Times New Roman font, double spaced, 1 inch margins
The fastest turnaround in the industry
Fully documented research — free bibliography guaranteed
Fax (additional info): 866-332-0244
Fax (additional info): 866-308-7123
Live Chat Support
Need order related assistance?—Click here to submit a inquiry
© Dreamessays.com. All Rights Reserved.
Dreamessays.com is the property of MEDIATECH LTD