consultants are sandburs

Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Republicans: Toying with your -- psyche?

Mr. Cruz, here. Mr. Kiffmeyer, here and here. The saving grace for Mr. Cruz, of the two, is he is not the total idiot; this excerpt:

Though the criminal charges against Webb were eventually dropped, a collection of sex-toy companies sued in federal court to challenge the constitutionality of the state's ban.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court of Appeals later ruled that the Texas law violated 14th Amendment privacy rights. Then-Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, now the state's Republican governor, unsuccessfully appealed, asking the full appeals court to review the case.

As solicitor general Cruz co-wrote an 83-page brief arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court "has never suggested that the substantive-due-process doctrine ensures individuals' ability to stimulate their genitals in ways that are neither connected to procreation nor associated with any particular lifestyle."

In an interview Friday night on New York's WABC radio, Cruz was asked if he would ban the sale of sex toys if he became president.

"Look, of course not, it's a ridiculous question, and of course not," Cruz responded. "What people do in their own private time with themselves is their own business and it's none of government's business."

Cruz campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart noted in an email that as solicitor general, Cruz had an obligation to defend Texas' laws in court, regardless of whether he agreed with them.

"Senator Cruz personally believes that the Texas law in question was, as (Supreme Court) Justice (Clarence) Thomas said in another context, an 'uncommonly silly' law," Stewart said. "But the office was nevertheless duty-bound to defend the policy judgment of the Texas Legislature."

Cruz defended the Texas ban as "protecting public morals — discouraging prurient interests in sexual gratification" and argued that in doing so the state had a vested moral interest in discouraging "autonomous sex."

Cruz's brief also suggested that the legal sale of sexual enhancement drugs such as Viagra was different because it can't be described as a "device."

Uh, which gender is it having Viagra as a policy grounding? What about Mr. Cruz having a view on the pill, or RU 486 for that morning after, or the human papilloma vaccine? It seems an active fact-focused press would press such questions. Why is there this letting Cruz skate?

No comments: