Santorum said that if consensual sex is acceptable because it is a privacy issue, then bigamy, polygamy, adultery, and incest are also acceptable when consensual and performed in private. The implication was that this was a reason to keep hay sex illegal because all 5 sex acts are immoral.
Why does this statement bother the gays? Is it because the other 4 are immoral but gay sex is moral?
Somebody name one world religion in which this is considered true.
If you aren't religious then Santorum's statement was empty.
If you are religious then you must believe homosexuality is immoral.
In either case, Santorum's statement was no more than the truth and nothing to be upset about.
So why are the gays so upset?
Can anyone answer this question?
Shalom.
If you live with seven women and call them all your wives, is that illegal if you never seek to marry any or more than one of the women? It isn't what is done in the privacy of their home but what they might seek in the eyes of the law that make bigamy and polygamy illegal. At what point is adultery an actionable offense in this country? Isn't it when the wronged spouse, in an open court, seeks legal remedy? Privacy isn't a defense if ones reasonable expectation of fidelity has been violated. What are the laws in this country regarding incest if not to protect endangered children, or would be children from the biogenetic results of the marriage of family members? Again, I don't see where privacy laws would afford any protection to an adult endangering a child or two cousins seeking a marriage license.
So I ask you, who is the victim of two adults engaging in homosexual conduct? If that victim is the fabric of our culture, morality, or some such other ambiguous notion, then why should pornography, teenage pregnancy, sexually charged advertising, etc. not be targeted? If the victim is the taxpayer or insurance purchaser who has increased costs (as suggested here) then why not target the overweight, the sedentary, smokers, etc. whose lifestyles lead to more illness?