Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Wallace T.
Are you advocating that sodomy be illegal? You realize that many heterosexuals engage in sodomy?

Do you believe that no one has a *right* to do what you believe is wrong?

796 posted on 12/19/2006 12:57:06 PM PST by Sunsong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 779 | View Replies ]


To: Sunsong
Prior to 1960, homosexual sodomy was illegal in all states. You and other "gay rights" advocates have equated such laws, universal in pre-1960 America with the Taliban, a position that equates our country for most of its history with Afghanistan in the 1990s. Do you believe the 50 states were theocracies until the last 45 years?

As far as it goes, we still have laws that restrict sexual freedom: sex with underage minors is illegal in all states, as are polygamy, bestiality, and necrophilia. Sexual intercourse of any sort is prohibited in public places almost everywhere. Governments have prohibited certain sexual activities in most time periods and most places, not only in America but worldwide. Prohibition of public sex may be justifiable for the sake of public order, but there is no public order issue with respect to polygamy or pederasty.

The existence of state-imposed limitations is true with respect to other freedoms. If you say we have absolute freedom of speech, for example, please tell me the last time you saw an advertisement for Marlboro cigarettes. Political and religious speech have generally been protected since the foundation of the Republic, but commercial speech is regulated considerably, and more so than was the case prior to 1930. The questions should be: should any boundary be placed on sexual activity and, if so, where should they be set?

With regard to the issue of rights, we must also distinguish what are the natural rights of man and what is the proper sphere of government. The fact that there is no right to do wrong does not necessarily mean that there is justification for state intervention. For example, a private company may fire a well qualified, competent employee for a less competent one because the latter is favored by management for some reason or other. As long as there is no breach of contract on the part of the employer and existing labor laws are followed, the competent employee may be fired. The firing may be immoral, but in a capitalist society, it is not a matter for state intervention. A person could be guilty of gluttony or excessive drinking, actions, though while sinful to Christians and others, are not generally subject to state intervention, even though an indigent obese person or alcoholic may become a charge to Medicaid or Medicare.

In present day America, governments do prohibit certain forms of sexual activity, even though the laws that prohibit consensual homosexual sodomy have been repealed or overturned. Furthermore, even if natural law theory denies the existence of a "right" to do wrong and Judeo-Christian morality denounces certain activities as wrong, general practice in certain areas, such as labor relations and self-destructive behavior, has been for noninterference by the state.

Do you believe that there should be no restrictions on sexual activity of any sort, except possibly for sexual intercourse in public areas? Additionally, all legislation is based on some moral code, even those, such as in the former Soviet Union, that do not draw upon a religious viewpoint. What moral code should be the foundation for the law?

797 posted on 12/19/2006 2:31:22 PM PST by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 796 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson