Quote of the Day - I'm stunned. Not from the charge, but from the fact that 'manipulating a sex toy' is a crime. A crime? Man, that's a privilege where I come from. I could understand if it was 'contributing to the delinquency of a sex toy.' That should be a crime, and I think I've committed that crime before, but just not on a boat in front of hundreds of people in broad daylight.
Imagine That Amnesty Program.
Here's the follow-up to a February 14, 2007 ruling from the Alabama Supreme Court, as MIPTC previously reported: stores who lost their attempts to overturn the Alabama legislature's ban on selling sex toys have taken their appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Alabamans need not worry, however. The sex toy stores are not likely to get a favorable reception - the U.S. Supreme Court turned down their request back in 2005, and they've lost at least three times in the Alabama Supreme Court.
The Alabama legislature got the whole ban started. You can possess sex toys in Alabama, you just can't sell them there. According to the Alabama Supreme Court, it's a legitimate attempt to legislate morality, but frankly the dichotomy is lost on me.
After all, if you're going to enact a ban on sales, why not also ban purchases and possession? Perhaps the Court doesn't want to face the news coverage when they start collecting sex toys in an amnesty program for state residents.