Is Love now a four letter word?

Kennedy's majority seems to try to say love is a protected liberty interest without actually having to say it. He hints at in in the introduction:

The instant case involves liberty of the person both in its spatial and transcendent dimensions.(1)

Then again in the most important part of the opinion, when he explains why the Bowers decision addressed the wrong issue, he comes right up to the cliff and turns back:

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.(6)

When sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring.(6)

As a matter of political philosophy, the idea that who we love, and the attendant physical manifestations of that love, are beyond the power of the government to regulate (so long as they don't harm others), is very attractive. On the other hand, Justice Thomas does have a point. I don't see it in the Constitution.
- posted by Tom Sawyer @ 12:42 PM