What about Lawrence v. Texas — which, as I’ve been saying for years, was a tacky gay domestic dispute that went to the U.S. Supreme Court:
In 2003 the US Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute which criminalised sodomy. This effectively made homosexuality legal throughout the US.
And as Justice Scalia noted in his dissent in Lawrence v Texas, it opened the door to redefining marriage:
“Today’s opinion dismantles the structure of constitutional law that has permitted a distinction to be made between heterosexual and homosexual unions, insofar as formal recognition in marriage is concerned.”
But the case was built on the lies of activists. In 1998, police received a report that “a black male [was] going crazy with a gun” in a suburb on the outskirts of Houston. Four officers burst into an apartment and found 55-year-old John Lawrence, a white man, and a 31-year-old black man, Tyron Garner. The evening ended with the men, both openly homosexual, being charged with “deviate sex” and held overnight in jail before being released.
Gay activists heard about the incident and took the case to the Supreme Court. The rest is history.
Last year, in his book Flagrant Conduct, Dale Carpenter, a gay law professor at the University of Minnesota, revealed that the conventional narrative is false. The police and Lawrence and Garner were all telling lies, for different reasons. The police charged the two men because they were cantankerous and flagrantly gay.
But the two men were not having sex. Originally they pleaded “not guilty”. Only when activists pointed out that theirs was an ideal case did they plead “no contest”.
“From the beginning,” their lawyer said, “we did not want to complicate the case by dealing with the facts. We said, ‘Whatever the police said, we will not challenge it.’” Carpenter observes, “Lawrence advanced as a case because nobody wanted to know what the underlying facts were.”
