Posted on 12/01/2004 3:48:43 PM PST by pete anderson
This part's fine -- the rest is fascist garbage.
This is a very scary proposition. What's next? There are scenes of incest in the Bible. Would this be banned as well?
Good point. The Bible would be out.
So encouraging more of this is a good idea?
HIV Found in More U.S. Gay, Bisexual Men
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20041201/ts_nm/aids_cases_dc_7
Reproductive parts are simply not made to be shoved into elimination organs.
Yes, this bill would ban he Bible.
Doh. Me stupid. Sorry.
I recall something about a prostitute and a gay teacher... I'll have to ask my kid, I read it sometime in the early eighties.
I remember the hooker. She was a "great conversationalist".
No, I don't recall the Bible promoting Sodomy, etc.
All powers not specifically given to the Federal Government are reserved to the states. States have the right to protect it citizens from sodomite literature.
Again, this really is up to the citizens of the Sovereign state of Alabama.
Here's some legal fun:
1) There's a gay character in a novel that's the protagonist, but he's portrayed as evil.
2) There's a gay character in a novel, and he's the protagonist, but he's portrayed as a complex character with some bad points and some good points.
3) There's a character in a novel that is devoid of sexual acts, the character is never actually called gay or homosexual, but the character is described as speaking with a lisp, dressing neatly with great skin, enjoying techno music, driving a Miata, who dances well, is a big fan of Bette Midler, and likes to vacation at Fire Island.
So which of these books get pulled from the library? And how much time do Alabama Courts spend deliberating this?
I wouldn't like it, but that is THEIR RIGHT.
Show me WHERE it says that.
However, there are heterosexual indiscretions in Bible and would violate Rep. Allen's standard.
Nice argument for 1861; ridiculous in 2004. If Alabama or any other state was fascist enough to pass this, which they aren't, the Federal Courts would block enforcement of the law until SCOTUS shot it down 9-0.
What "reasoning" did I use, by the way?
I merely asked this question: How does a ban on public funds get twisted into a ban of something?
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.