[muir_redwoods]

"There's no rhyme or reason to these rulings."

The law that banned cohabitation is apace with the laws that ban smoking in ones's home or mandate helmet use by motorcyclists. It's the nanny state that is trying to regulate your life. The fact that banning cohabitation is consistent with the ten commandments will et some here to agree with it as a law but they fail to see the intrusion by the state into our lives.

If the state mandated adherence to Leviticus some here would applaud it

[SmoothTalker]

"If the state mandated adherence to Leviticus some here would applaud it"

Sad but very true. This board is crawling with big government "Conservatives" who have a governing philosophy that is in reality little different from the liberals that they decry. They want an all powerful government that plays a big role in our everyday lives. They are willing to shed core conservative values just because the nanny state happens to be pushing something they agree on.

[puroresu]

Laws banning cohabitation existed, I would expect, in every state in the union in early America. They existed long before the Nanny State. The Nanny State was brought to us by people like the ACLU, who applauded the court for striking down the cohabitation law.

If you're a conservative, where would you rather live in terms of the current government and political atmosphere: Sweden or South Carolina? HINT: There's not the chance of a snowball in hell of a law against fornication passing in Sweden.