Ediblog.com
©2003 Dr. Judith Reisman
(This is the second of a three-part series)
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy based his pro-sodomy majority opinion in
Lawrence v. Texas on legal sources that relied on the proven fraud,
Prof. Alfred C. Kinsey. Kennedy has company. Citing Kinsey's phony
"data" is standard procedure in the legal profession—and in the
academic "scholarship" that jurists use to support their rulings.
Part one in this series exposed the Court's "scientific
understanding" in Lawrence as turning on the 1955 American Law
Institute Model Penal Code (ALIMPC) and the 1957 (British) Wolfenden Report.
Both relied on Kinsey's bogus "findings" in his Sexual Behavior
in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female
(1953).
In part two, we'll scrutinize more Kinsey-worshiping—the sort of
"scientific subject matter" that persuaded six Supreme Court
justices in Lawrence that outlawing "homosexual sodomy furthers
no legitimate state interest."
In his powerful dissent from Lawrence, Justice Antonin Scalia warned,
"[s]tate laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest,
prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity .
. . [are all] called into question by today's decision."
In addition, he chided the academic "law-profession culture" for
relying on everything but the Constitution.
Academia's Sexual Ideology
Justice Scalia is right; the "law-profession culture" is on record
as subscribing to Kinsey's sexual ideology. Consider that over a 16-year
period, from 1982 to 1998, at least 1,000 major law school journal articles
quoted Kinsey as their sex science authority. And the critically important
American Association of Law Schools commands total submission to its
homosexual "equity" ethic.
But it's not just the law schools. One survey (American Enterprise,
2002) confirms the anecdotal observation that almost 100% of those teaching
history, women's and "gay studies" in our major universities are
self-identified as leftists. This means academia is blacklisting
traditionalist scholars. That is bad science—and, as seen in Lawrence,
it produces bad law.
Kinsey disciples also dominate the social sciences. The Science Citation
& Social Science Citation Indices from 1948 to 1997 yielded 5,796
academic publications that quoted Kinsey, far more than the next
"sexuality" contender, Masters & Johnson, at 3,716.
Instead of objectively searching for truth, scholars are accepting Kinseyan
sexuality uncritically because they like his fake "findings."
As University of Michigan English Professor David Halperin wrote in 1996,
"lesbian and gay studies . . . expresses an uncompromising political
militancy . . . [triggering] a far-reaching intellectual transformation in the
disciplines of the humanities, arts and social sciences as well as in the
social life of American universities and in the professional culture of
American academe."
In "What Gay Studies Taught the Court," Rick Perlstein, a Washington
Post reporter, notes that "gay studies . . . history
professors" have helped demolish America's anti-sodomy laws by
legitimizing what were formerly viewed as "political correctness"
and "special interest studies." He says the Supreme Court has made
"gay studies . . . scholarship . . . bedrock . . . for settling the law
of the land."
In Lawrence, the Court endorsed the sexual research by name
of "gay studies" figures, along with Richard Posner, Chief Justice
of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
The ALIMPC, as well as all of the Court's academic experts that follow,
trace their "pioneering" origin to Kinsey. Yet none condemns—or
even admits—his sexual psychopathic and sadistic "orientation" and
his employment of pedophiles to sodomize infants and children. The
"orgasm" tests (see Table 34), timed by stopwatch, are reproduced
from Kinsey's 1948 volume.
First, consider the Court's cite to Posner's Overcoming Law. Here
Posner says, "Kinsey's scale . . . from zero to six . . . represent[s]
the range of homosexual preferences," invoking Kinsey's made-up
homosexual index as if it reflected reality. Posner repeats Kinsey's
fraudulent "findings" on pure faith and praises his supposed sexual
wisdom, but conveniently ignores Kinsey collaborators' wicked
"orgasm" torture "experiments" on children—even on
babies less than a year old. The psychopathic Kinsey is Posner's sex authority
. . . and Posner is the Court's sex authority.
Next, the Court names Intimate Matters, by Estelle Freedman and John
D'Emilio, well-funded professors of History, Women's and Gay Studies. They
devote a full 20 of their text's 428 pages to quoting Kinsey's claims. Kinsey
made, they say, "the strongest assault on sexual reticence in the public
realm" and helped sway Supreme Court decisions on "obscenity."
The "new history" typically uses Kinsey's fraud to sabotage marital
fidelity and chastity. Freedman and D'Emilio hide the truth that so few normal
women would talk to Kinsey that he had to define a wife as someone who merely
lived "at least a year" with a man. By casting prostitutes and other
aberrant women as spouses, Kinsey created high rates of female premarital
promiscuity, adultery and abortion that these "historians" told the
Court were true.
The authors point out that "Kinsey's estimates dwarfed all previous
calculations" of homosexuality, but they cover up data which disprove
Kinsey's ideology-driven claims that homosexuality is "benign."
Kinsey is Freedman and D'Emilio's sex authority and they are the court's sex
authority.
Lastly, the court quotes from "gay studies historian" Jonathan
Katz's book, The Invention of Heterosexuality, which promotes
Kinsey's frauds. Katz argues elsewhere that ever since "Kinsey's
scale," the notion of "an erotic continuum has become a popular
mainstay of a liberal sexual pluralism," adding that "serious"
writing about sex has been designed . . . to give a bastard subject
legitimacy."
In its citations of Kinsey-worshipping academics, the U.S. Supreme Court left
out a few awkward facts about Kinsey as sexual "authority." For
instance, Kinsey hid his own bisexual, homosexual, pornographic,
sadomasochistic and pedophile "interests."
Even friendly biographer James Jones documented Kinsey's sexual harassment of
males, his masturbation compulsion and the violent sex rituals that led to his
untimely death. Jones confirmed that Kinsey disguised himself as a staid,
middle-American family man and scholar in order to promote his legal and
socio-sexual agenda.
Kinsey is at once the most powerful, and the weakest, link in the liberals'
chain as they incessantly subvert American health and welfare.