Sometimes I just look at the US and wonder how it got into the position it occupies today.

It's been fairly widely reported that the US Supreme Court has overturned a Texan ban on sexual intercourse between two consenting adult men.

I beg your pardon? They had to do what? In the 21st century?

Although this ruling is A Good Thing, the fact that it was banned in the first place came as news to me - and I'm sure I'm not alone.

While it was always understood that the Bible Belt would look unfavourably on gay relationships, I never thought that such antiquated, bigoted legislation would be tolerated even in the most pious of states. But apparently restriction of "crimes against nature" has a very big following in certain parts of the land of the free.

Hands up all those who, before today, knew that gay sex was illegal in Texas. Or that more than a quarter of the states even see fellatio as felonious. And a few more have only become more tolerant in recent years. Like this piece said in 1998, "Go down on your date in Michigan and you could spend 15 years up the river."

Nine states ban buggering and blowjobs for everyone: Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah and Virginia. Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma and, until today, Texas, punish only gays. (At the risk of stereotyping the southern states, how happy am I to see Georgia missing from that list.) I'm not sure whether this distinction between straight and gay sodomy makes The Gang Of Four more or less enlightened than the other nine - or whether they're all just as
bad as each other.

But fortunately, it seems that very few of the states actively enforce the laws, and today's ruling will hopefully lead to the universal repeal of such legislation. There shouldn't be much fuss - if they ain't using 'em, why do they need 'em?

I realise that the separation of federal and state legislature is very important to many Americans, but sometimes the less enlightened need showing the way. And yes, I know that's imposing my own set of morals on others, and makes me open to allegations of being a hypocrite.

However this ruling only serves to liberate a large group of people, and for me that's a big difference. While I don't see myself as taking advantage of the change in the law, I'll happily fight for those who want to. And although I disagree with the bigots to the point of fury, I'll not see their right to hold different beliefs extinguished, just their ability to oppress other human beings.

What Cowboy George will make of this move by the people who put him in power is hard to tell. But if the Supreme Court carries on like this, then one day they may just start making up for making themselves the only nine voters who got a say in the 2000 election.