Posted on 07/07/2007 10:16:15 AM PDT by wagglebee
If it is possible to go after a diocese because a priest engaged in sexual misbehavior, why couldn’t one go after a diocese because that misbehavior led a victim to act out gay behavior up to their illness and eventual death?
For example, why couldn’t the employer of Rock Hudson (or his estate) be sued for negligently turning a blind eye to sexual predation leading to the infection of the preyed upon?
Why couldn’t my United Methodist denomination be sued for it’s bishop turning a negligent, blind eye to the sexual predation that accompanies gathering those with histories of same and turning them loose amidst potential prey?
“the results of a study in Scandinavia showing that men in same-sex marriages die 24 years earlier than their counterparts in the general population”
I’ve always been amazed at how the liberal media assists the homosexuals in hiding the sickening facts about their ‘lifestyle’. Thankfully the tide is turning and more and more people are standing up to these freaks.
Yeah, that second hand smoke.
This only proves that the global warming nuts will win.
It’s a travesty on “Big Government”, “Big Tobacco”, etc.
Oh my! That image within a post of “Big Sodomy” should bring back all of the laws of our past.
Leftist Liberal moonbats can promote ass sex all they like, but one thing they can’t do, is prevent nature from developing ways to correct abominations that defy her intended design, and her ability to eventually correct abominations, one way or another. If aids didn’t do the job and correct behavior, butt rot, dick cancer or some other poop chute violator’s disease will eventually be successful
Don't confuse illegal acts with legal ones. Most of the things you mention are ALREADY illegal and can be prosecuted as such.
Granted, you can sue anybody you want for anything you want. The question is whether the suit will succeed, and produce the result you want.
The approach this article suggests, smacks of the "hate crime" nonsense, in which an already illegal activity (say, killing somebody) is made somehow "more" illegal because it was done with "Thought Crime" too. Sorry, won't wash. Any argument that talking about homosexual activity should be illegal because the activity is dangerous is just doomed.
If the particular activity is illegal, it can be prosecuted as such. Advocating legal-but-dangerous activities is legal, and should remain so, just as advocating sky-jumping and other dangerous activities is legal. For that matter, advocating illegal activities is generally considered protected speech under the First Amendment. I guarantee you that you don't want the Government deciding that you can be sued for talking about an action just because the action is illegal -- that's one of the marks of tyranny, FRiend.
Yes, their lifespan, for male homosexuals, is 39 for those with AIDS and 41 for those NOT with AIDS. I had one person challenge my statistics because the every-day newspaper obituaries do NOT list cause of death. But these statistics came from their OWN HOMOSEXUAL MAGAZINES where they trumpeted the sadness of their colleagues’ deaths and denounced our government’s dragging its feet in finding a cure.
These facts were THEIRS, not mine. So, smokers live another 30 or more years. Now, whose lifestyle is a disgrace?
I’m sympathetic to the writer’s point, but politically he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
On what theory? Cigarettes were actionable because of products liability. Sexuality is not usually a product.
See post #21. Help me make this into a theory. I’ve got gobs of cash, and you’ll get $350 per hour during the brainstorming, and a 50% cut of the take with a guaranteed minimum.
I want you to help me get there.
How do we do it, counselor?
Just find a plaintiff.
Love it. Fight vermin with greedy vermin. Play on greed to silence them.
Absolutely love it.
Silly me. Thought that was referring to a Chinese fortress.
What if the bishop encouraged an atmosphere “welcoming” to unrepentant predatory gays?
If he was authorized by the denomination to do that and someone was injured as a result, then both the Bishop and the denomination could be held liable.
But first you need to find an injured party.
I figured the image would not last, but I had to give it a shot. LOL
Physical injury better than psych injury?
God told Satan, this is your Earth, Please God help us!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.