Freedom extends beyond spatial bounds.  Liberty presumes an autonomy of self that includes freedom of thought, belief, expression, and certain intimate conduct.  The instant case involves liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions. 

[The Bowers Court failed] to appreciate the extent of the liberty at stake.  To say that the issue in Bowers was simply the right to engage in certain sexual conduct demeans the claim the individual put forward, just as it would demean a married couple were it to be said marriage is simply about the right to have sexual intercourse.  The laws involved in Bowers and here are, to be sure, statutes that purport to do no more than prohibit a particular sexual act.  Their penalties and purposes, though, have more far-reaching consequences, touching upon the most private human conduct, sexual behavior, and in the most private of places, the home…

…When sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring.  The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to make this choice.  

***

the petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives.  The State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime.  Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government.  ”It is a promise of the Constitution that there is a realm of personal liberty which the government may not enter.”

Justice Kennedy writing the majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas