Skip to comments.
A nifty rhetorical trick (SANTORUM IS RIGHT)
The Financial Times ^
| April 28, 2003
| Christopher Caldwell
Posted on 04/27/2003 3:11:30 PM PDT by MadIvan
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-25 last
To: Victoria Delsoul
Well said!
To: MadIvan
Bump for a great and encouraging article.
22
posted on
04/28/2003 12:23:11 AM PDT
by
Dr. Eckleburg
(There are very few shades of gray.)
To: Kevin Curry
PA Dutch ditto. Now if only we can replace Specter with Toomey.
23
posted on
04/28/2003 6:07:31 AM PDT
by
airborne
To: MadIvan
But, as Mr Santorum implied, it falls in the same category as many disreputable forms of sex such as prostitution, incest between adults, and polygamy - all of which are consensual
Precisely.
What is the argument that allows prostitution to be criminalized? Incest? Polygamy?
If it is "fear" of the larger society being harmed in some way, then the same rationale should apply to homosexuality.
If it is "demonstration" of types of harm to the greater society -- medical costs, welfare costs, biological costs, social costs -- then the same rationale should apply to homosexuality.
If there is a demonstrable danger to the general welfare, then there is a rationale for controlling the behavior.
To: RockBassCreek
You can justify laws criminalizing prostitution and sodomy on public health grounds alone.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-25 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson