Posted on 04/17/2003 10:32:53 AM PDT by Remedy
Thomas Jefferson on Sodomy Sect. XIV. Whosoever shall be guilty of rape, polygamy, or sodomy* with a man or woman, shall be punished; if a man, by castration, a woman, by boring through the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch in diameter at the least. Peterson, Merrill D. "Crimes and Punishments" Thomas Jefferson: Writings Public Papers (Literary Classics of the United States, Inc. 1984) pp. 355, 356.
BURGER, C.J., Concurring Opinion Decisions of individuals relating to homosexual conduct have been subject to state intervention throughout the history of Western civilization. Condemnation of those practices is firmly rooted in Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards. Homosexual sodomy was a capital crime under Roman law…. During the English Reformation, when powers of the ecclesiastical courts were transferred to the King's Courts, the first English statute criminalizing sodomy was passed…. Blackstone described "the infamous crime against nature" as an offense of "deeper malignity" than rape, a heinous act "the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature," and "a crime not fit to be named." W. Blackstone, Commentaries . The common law of England, including its prohibition of sodomy, became the received law of Georgia and the other Colonies. In 1816, the Georgia Legislature passed the statute at issue here, and that statute has been continuously in force in one form or another since that time. To hold that the act of homosexual sodomy is somehow protected as a fundamental right would be to cast aside millennia of moral teaching.
Hundreds rally for '10 Commandments judge' The effort is in response to the Alabama high court's unanimous decision to reject a lesbian mother's child custody petition. Moore wrote a separate concurring opinion, repudiating homosexuality on religious grounds, calling it "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature and of nature's God."
More than a dozen briefs filed at the United States Supreme Court this week oppose the declaration of a new constitutional right in Lawrence v. Texas.
Alabama, South Carolina, and Utah (State Attorneys General)
American Center for Law and Justice
Jay Alan Sekulow, Counsel of Record
American Family Association
Stephen M. Crampton, Counsel of Record
Center for Arizona Policy
This brief refutes the errors expressed in the opposing amicus submitted by the American Psychology Association.
Len L. Munsil, Counsel of Record
Center for Law and Justice International
Pat Monaghan, Counsel of Record
Center for the Original Intent of the Constitution
Michael P. Farris, Counsel of Record
Concerned Women for America
Janet M. LaRue, Counsel of Record
Family Research Council & Focus on the Family
Robert P. George, Counsel of Record
Legislators, State of Texas
Kelly Shackelford, Counsel of Record
Liberty Counsel
Mathew D. Staver, Counsel of Record
Pro Family Law Center
Richard Ackerman, Counsel of Record
Texas Eagle Forum; Daughters of Liberty Republican Women of Houston, Texas;
Spirit of Freedom Republican Women's Club
Teresa Stanton Collett, Counsel for Amici Curiae
Texas Physicians Resource Council, Christian Medical and Dental Association, Catholic Medical Association
Glen Lavy, Counsel of Record
United Families International
Paul Benjamin Linton, Counsel for the Amicus
They are not happy? Give parents Prozak and Ritalin for the kids!
Yes, you need to start early if you want to hook them up.
Is Newton represented by........Barney Frank by chance?
Newton is representing Barney Frank. I don’t know which perverted area Frank represents.
Wow, really? So in Newton there are other religions than Unitarians and Reformed?
Do you support teaching small children to "eat or wallow in" feces? Are you a homosexual?
Some reporters know stenography.
You can stop trying to deny what was said. This same crap was being shoveled last year and nobody could dispute its content because it was recorded, and despite all the pissing and whining nothing was done about it because nothing could be done about it.
The fact is, it does not matter how this information is being attained. You know homosexuality is being taught in elementary schools (as seen in post #46). That may be well, good, and perfectly acceptable to you, it is not to every responsible parent.
We have all been shown by example just exactly what homosexuals have in mind for our kids, and our response should be clear:
They should stay the forking hell away from our children. Period. No if's. No and's. No but's. No grey areas. No middle ground. No discussion. No debate.
And yet, most of your posts in this thread challenge the credibility of MassNews and how they got this information, strongly implying they made it all up.
Allow me to quote the American Heritage Dictionary:
denial SYLLABICATION: de·ni·al PRONUNCIATION: AUDIO: d-nl KEY NOUN: 1. A refusal to comply with or satisfy a request. 2a. A refusal to grant the truth of a statement or allegation; a contradiction. b. Law The opposing by a defendant of an allegation of the plaintiff. 3a. A refusal to accept or believe something, such as a doctrine or belief. b. Psychology An unconscious defense mechanism characterized by refusal to acknowledge painful realities, thoughts, or feelings. 4. The act of disowning or disavowing; repudiation. 5. Abstinence; self-denial.
Sound familiar?
"Post #46" was just one of the propaganda ponies galloping through.
No, it was excerpts from two reviews of a book written by two people who are obviously interested in advancing the homosexual agenda in the public school arena. Your assertion is as bogus as calling Larry Kramer's direct quote condoning pedophilia propoganda simply because I mentioned it.
If elementary schools "teach" that gays actually EXIST and that they are just as deserving of human rights and respect, then I have no problem with that.
You know, it is really not a good idea to play ignorant. Not here. Not if you want to be intellectually kicked around like a soccer ball at the World Cup.
The debate is in your interpretation of events. It is a fact that you have opinions... but that does not make your opinions fact.
You know, when I read things like this, you attempting to blur what is absolute and obvious, I cannot help but wonder if you are a troll or actually sincere about the things you say.
But then again, it was not all that long ago you actually tried to defend the North American Man-Boy Love Association in public, so perhaps the latter is true.
Keep digging that hole. The farther down you get, the less happy you will be with what you see.
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.