Fwill In The Blank

That was quick. George Fwill already is having a hissy about Lawrence v. Texas. Guess which one of the "myriad of possible permutations of consensual adult sexual activities" is conspicuously absent from Fwill's parade of nasties:

"The question is not whether states are wise to criminalize this or that sex act outside of marriage. Rather, the question is: Once the court has said that some such acts are constitutional rights, by what principle are any of the myriad possible permutations of consensual adult sexual activities denied the same standing?

"Once consent-- 'choice' -- supplants marriage as the important interest served by cloaking sexual activities as constitutional rights, by what principle is any consensual adult sexual conduct not a protected right? Bigamy? Polygamy? Prostitution? Incest? Even--if we assume animals can consent, or that their consent does not matter--bestiality?"

Did you spot it? Purely an oversight, I'm sure.