[I_love_weather]

Quote "Why don't we eliminate all laws then?"

Laws are meant to protect people. Of course we need laws.

If two consenting adults want to do something in their bedroom...and they are not hurting anyone...I don't think we need a law saying that should or should not do - whatever it is they are doing.

Laws are mean for those who commit crimes. Not meant for people have sex...

[MrLee]

Perversion is still perversion!

[Dan from Michigan]

I don't care what adults do in their homes either.

I DO have a major problem with

1. Judicial activist tyrants in black robes.

2. My money paying for benefits.

3. This stuff around the kids.

[rikkir]

"Laws are meant to protect people. Of course we need laws."

They are also meant to protect institutions, property, etc. such as the isntitution of marriage. Marriage is defined as a union (civil, social, and a covenant before God) between a male and a female. It's main purpose was the continuation of our species, in other words procreation. God did not send down the edict of marriage so two men could have self gratifying unnatural copulation and insurance benefits. If you want to change insurance laws (for instance if two good friends share a house for financial reasons and want to extend benefits to each other) change those laws, but why destroy one of the moral foundations that our society has been built on. Is your goal anarchy? Is it the reverting of our species to an animal like state? Would one of the goals be that we can run around and have sex with anyone with no consequenses or commitment(see abortion). I dont see the need for same sex marriages except for the continuation of an agenda that involves the complete removal of any moral standard (religious or otherwise) from our society.
Maybe you'll say I'm backwards, simple and a prude, but I do subscibe to the theory that our republic can not stand without a foundation based on morality. Everyday, through a consistant incrementalism from the left, that foundation is chipped away. I am afraid, because of apathy of good and decent people, that we may already be over the cliff.

"If two consenting adults want to do something in their bedroom...and they are not hurting anyone...I don't think we need a law saying that should or should not do - whatever it is they are doing."


Does this view include drugs? How about incest (adult children)? What about beastiality? Where do you draw the line on that consenting adults thing.

"Laws are mean for those who commit crimes. Not meant for people have sex..."


Pedophilia by defination is not rape (act of violence), are there not laws dealing with that. Or maybe we should include that in the privacy of the bedroom category such as that fine outstanding homosexual group NAMBLA advocates.
At some point we as a society have to say enough, and stop the slide down the slope.

[Aquinasfan]

If two consenting adults want to do something in their bedroom...and they are not hurting anyone...

How do you know that?

Sodomy is an evil. We can know this with certainty through unaided reason since it is an unnatural act. It is an especially evil unnatural act since it is an abuse of one of man's greatest powers, the power to procreate.

Therefore, those who participate in the act harm themselves. Since they are also members of society, they harm society, just as a single broken egg damages a dozen eggs.

The question arises as to whether all vices should be criminalized. One consideration regarding the criminalization of a vice is whether the suppression of the vice results in greater vice (i.e., the corruption of law enforcement). Another consideration is the gravity of the crime. This consideration can overide the former.

Such is certainly the case regarding sodomy. This crime strikes at the heart of society, since without procreation society itself ceases to exist.