Should gay sodomy be illegal?

[opebo]

No, it should be legal. The state has no business regulating private consensual sex.

Correct emsworth.  In fact such bans are unconstitutional, as they violate the right to privacy.

Does anyone know if they violate substantive due process?

[opebo]

Does anyone know if they violate substantive due process?

There is no such thing as "substantive due process"--that is nothing more than a figment of the Supreme Court's imagination. But if there were such a thing as substantive due process, then a ban on sodomy would indeed violate it (as the Supreme Court recently held in Lawrence v. Texas).

No, you're merely imagining that there is no substantive due process.

[opebo]

There is no "right to privacy" in the Constitution.

Yes there is.

[opebo]

There is no "right to privacy" in the Constitution.

Yes there is.

Where?

In most of the first ten amendments, Alcon, and in all of them taken together.

[opebo]

1. Freedom of religion and expression - Yes
2. Right to bear arms - Yes
3. Quartering soldiers - Yes
4. Search and seisure - Yes
5. Rights of persons - Yes
6. Rights of accused in criminal prosecutions - Yes
7. Civil trials - No
8. Further guarantees in criminal cases - Yes
9. Unenmumerated rights - Yes
10. Reserved powers  - Not sure

1-6, as well as 8 and 9 all confirm a right to privacy.  7 and 10 I'm not so sure about, but they certainly don't do anything so suggest the opposite.

[opebo]

Where is the generic right to privacy?

As I said in all of those amendments, since they are all based upon a presumption of a right to privacy.

[opebo]

No. The very fact that they list specific rights to privacy makes it quite clear that there is no generic right to privacy anywhere enumerated.

There is no need to enumerate it.  One can simply assume it from the obvious intention of the document as a whole, and these listed amendments.

[opebo]

How do you identify this supposed 'obvious' intention? The fact that specific rights to privacy are enumerated would make it pretty clear by implication that there is no generic right to privacy.

All of those rights in the Bill of Rights stem from a right to privacy, Philip.

[opebo]

They are specific rights to privacy. There is no evidence of a generic right to privacy. Indeed, the text itself makes that clear by implication.

Not at all.  It would be impossible to list all the rights, and they wisely did not attempt to do so.  I believe there is some famous line in there where they suggest that the enumerated rights aren't intended to imply that there may not be other rights in addition.