Here’s a much better link to the Supreme Court opinions in the Lawrence v. Texas case. It’s a great site run by the Legal Information Institute, and you can retrieve all the opinions on a particular case in both HTML and PDF format.

Peter is right about the awfulness of the majority opinion in Lawrence. Here’s as aspect of it I haven’t seen much commented on. Consider these passages by Justice Kennedy:

1. This, as a general rule, should counsel against attempts by the State, or a court, to define the meaning of the relationship or to set its boundaries absent injury to a person or abuse of an institution the law protects.

2. To say that the issue in Bowers was simply the right to engage in certain sexual conduct demeans the claim the individual put forward, just as it would demean a married couple were it to be said marriage is simply about the right to have sexual intercourse.

3. When homosexual conduct is made criminal by the law of the State, that declaration in and of itself is an invitation to subject homosexual persons to discrimination both in the public and in the private spheres.

4. And then there was the passage, too lengthy to quote here, that explicitly expands the Casey “sweet mystery of life” umbrella to include homosexuality.

All these passages make it fairly obvious to me that the Court has now definitively read into constitutional law the philosophical position that homosexuality is not something you do, but something you are. I don’t see how any discrimination against homosexuals can be sustained legally, any more than discrimination against racial minorities. That being the case, on what grounds can public schools prevent activist teachers from “queering elementary education“?