Supreme Court Leaves Alabama's Immorality Intact
October 1, 2007
Raising a moral but not a legal issue,
the American Humanist Association denounced the state of Alabama today. This
was in the wake of the Supreme Court's afternoon decision to let stand a
lower court ruling upholding Alabama's ban on the sale of sex toys.
"You can sell guns in Alabama, which enable buyers to potentially cause pain
or death, but now you can't sell sex toys there, devices which enable buyers
to cause pleasure," declared Mel Lipman, president of the American Humanist
Association. "That shows just how warped religiously-motivated 'family
values' can become."
Fred Edwords, director of communications for the American Humanist
Association added, "To the humanist, pleasure isn't only enjoyable, it's
moral. Giving and receiving pleasure enhances life and contributes to
health. Not only is there nothing wrong with it, it is a positive and
beneficial part of life."
The American Humanist Association has long supported sexual freedom and
advocated a philosophy that supports a wide range of responsible pleasures:
intellectual, aesthetic, and physical.
"Pleasure is often derided because reckless engagement in it can cause
harm," Edwords pointed out. "But the harm is caused by the recklessness, not
the pleasure. Ice cream is good, too, but that doesn't mean you should eat
so much of it you get sick."
"Nor should you ban the sale of ice cream just because people enjoy it,"
Lipman added. "Banning the sale of sex toys is in the same category. It is
immoral to prohibit the sale of harmless devices merely because they produce
sexual enjoyment. Therefore, we conclude that the state of Alabama stands
morality on its head by seeking to punish the sale of pleasure devices."
