> Next: An SC endorsement of rimming?
>
> <http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/26/scotus.sodomy/index.html>
>
> Can't see why Clarence dissented -- the dude loves porn,
> so you'd think this would be a no-brainer, as most of his
> decisions are . . .
Yeah, and that shithead Scalia read his dissent from the bench again like he did with Colorado's 2-A.
What an asshole.
-- no Onan
"superior sound quality"