[NutCrackerBoy]

If they want "privacy" and freedom in the bedroom, the "don't ask, don't tell" policy on sodomy is the better alternative to state-licensed perversion. No homosexual or lesbian is currently prevented from copulating by any "conservative" policy.

As soon as something becomes fairly well accepted as a commonsensical virtue, some people in robes are going to turn around and coerce it. Example:

The virtue: it is a virtue to live and let live.
The coercion: we had SCOTUS torture the Constitution to ban any state, village, or town from having an anti-sodomy law.

The virtue: one should treat a gay couple with dignity - they have the same feelings of love and loss that hets do.
The coercion: Massachusetts SJC tortures its Constitution to ban any distinction between heterosexual and homosexual marriage.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

No adult anywhere in America is currently being prevented from copulating or from purchasing a life supply of condoms. This tiresome argument replayed by liberals OVER AND OVER AND OVER again about the "privacy of the bedroom" is ridiculous. "Conservatives" who pander to this in hopes of looking and sounding "cool" are quite silly. The idea that unless the government is funding some area of sexual social engineering that someone's "rights" are being hindered is ridiculous and HOWLINGLY ABSURD.

You can walk on to the campus of almost any college or university and get FREE condoms. Condoms for people in Pakistan or Tasmania have NOTHING to do with the U.S. Constitution or the "sexual freedom" of Americans. It's an absurd issue and the "libertarian" social policy spin is ridiculous. There is NOTHING "libertarian" about putting the government in the business of fomenting, directing, and controlling experiment social engineering on sexuality. The idea of giving U.S. tax dollars to the UN to do this is just OFF THE RADAR. Nothing "libertarian" about the UN or its genocidal depopulation schemes.