Replies

However, if homosexual sodomy has been shown to be a serious health problem (which it is), then does the government have some kind of compelling interest in limiting or criminalizing such?

Eating red meat has also been shown to create serious health problems.

Do you want the government to impose vegetarianism on you?

That, quite frankly, is the most asinine thing I've seen in a long, long, LONG time. So if I'm a devout Christian (which I am not), I should vote for someone antithical to my views? That's rich.

Do you then believe that the right thing for people who choose vegetarianism in their personal lives to do is to support policies that makes vegetarianism mandatory for all?

Do you believe this is the best way for a civil society to behave?
Or do you now see why I believe people need to seperate the personal from the political?

Eating red meat has also been shown to create serious health problems. Do you want the government to impose vegetarianism on you?

That was a rather poor strawman, as the Atkins Diet shows that red meat actually is quite good for you. However, if a state did try to limit the consumption of red meat, I would not live there. I actually don't think that homosexual sodomy should be illegal - however, homosexual sodomy is close to the same likelihood of harm threshhold that drunk driving inhabits - so the issue does stay in play. But I also don't think that the federal government has any say in the matter, one way or the other.

Do you then believe that the right thing for people who choose vegetarianism in their personal lives to do is to support policies that makes vegetarianism mandatory for all? Do you believe this is the best way for a civil society to behave?

Under the Constitution, this would be up to the states, and if a given state was so populated with idiots that they would attempt such a law, then I simply wouldn't live there, and its government and tax base would collapse under the weight of the collective stupidity there. That's the beauty of federalism - it gives people choices. But having the feds usurp powers means we can't escape stupidity at the federal level.

Or do you now see why I believe people need to seperate the personal from the political?

Two things - first of all, learn how to spell separate, and second, the personal frames the political. The Constituion limits how far that can go, but to ask that people sepArate the two is quite idiotic.