Posted on 05/11/2003 7:04:33 AM PDT by RJCogburn
You want sodomy outlawed by the government, but you want G*d to watch for the crime and report it to the authorities?
The Second Amendment gives you the right to defend yourself?
You have reading comprehension problems, don't you?
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Our right to bear arms shall not be infringed so that we can defend the nation, not ourselves. Unless you have a different version of the Second. It seems that you have a different Constitution than the one generally used by the rest of us.
What need does Our Heavenly Father have for an enforcer on Earth? Where does Our Heavenly Father ask for the government's help?
"I would be saying nothing if it was not stuck in my face demanding special status simply base on the manner of whom and how sex is done."
You and the spouse have never enjoyed a bit of sodomy?
Don't lie, Our Heavenly Father is watching and knows what you do in the privacy of your bedroom.
Sodomy is both anal AND oral sex.
You are giving homosexuals the special status, with your biases, your illogical fear of what others do in private, and your demands that secular laws be anacted which target a specific segment of the populattion.
You don't want homosexuality classified as a special stauts? Then quit giving it to them.
Grow up.
Every state had sodomy laws and enforced them before the so-called sexual revolution of the 1960s brought with it tens of millions of AIDS victims, tens of millions of aborted children, the scourge of other aggressive STDs including anal gonorrhea and hepatitis B, the meltdown of the traditional family, and armies of fatherless young men forming criminal gangs in every major American city.
The dismantling of the sodomy laws--which had been in place since the founding the Republic--has been a powerful abrasive in the larger erosion of the quality of life in America. This erosion has resulted, and will continue to result in massive socialism to pay for the self-indulgent, irresponsible excess.
And yet the bogeyman of "bedroom police" cannot be found anywhere in this puzzle other than in the frenzied, fevered minds of swooners such as yourself. In Texas (as in the case now before SCOTUS), the sodomites were so hard-pressed to find "bedroom police" they had to resort to lying to the police to get them into the bedroom for the premeditiated purpose of having the police arrest them so they would even have a test case.
At any time before this case became debated in public--at any time in the more than 150-plus years of Texas history--did you or any other Texan ever fear "bedroom police" coming into your bedroom? Absolutely not. This bogeyman is a recent creation, tailor-made to advance the gay activist agenda--which will culminate in pro-gay federal hate crime legislation (and entitlements) and gay marriage. You are helping to midwife these abominations into existence.
Lies and bamboozlery, Luis. Like Clinton, that is all that you sodomy lovers and enablers have in your armory. The lies are fairly effective though. You've conned otherwise level-headed FReepers such as Iron Jack and sinkspur into supporting the aim-for-the-anus crowd; you've got them cowering in fear of your bogeyman bedroom police.
What you preach isn't the gospel of conservatism. It is a decaying, disease-ridden corpse that you fob off as conservatism.
Are you assuming that this happens strictly for the sake of sex?
I have traveled on business where sharing a room with another man was required.
Would you have that outlawed, and force companies to bunk up male and female employees?
The rest of the things mentioned happen on public, I don't have a problem with laws that regulate public behavior. I have a problem with laws that regulate private, consensual behavior.
Hey Kevin, there were laws against fornication (pre-marital sex) and adultery as well.
Why do you not consider re-enacting those as well?
What do you think?
A big "A" in scarlet on the clothing of the offending parties?
Kevin...you've never enjoyed oral sex withn the wife or girlfriend?
Have you ever indulged in fornication?
If you answer is no, I know you are a liar.
Strawman, Luis. Grow up, and address reality.
What a shock.
The perverts applaud your efforts at tolerating their evil. There are drug users and pushers, prostitutes, johns, and pimps, bestialphiles, pedophiles, and necrophiles applauding your unconservative stance, too.
The problem with you, is that you want to interpret the constitution when you need to support your arguments, then turn around and demand literal interpretation of others when you want your fallacies debunked.
You want specific constitutional verbiage detailing a right to privacy, but want to freely interpret the second to support your viewpoint.
Loser.
You have never enjoyed sodomy with your spouse or girlfriend?
Nope.
I have no problem saying what I mean. You often have a problem taking it at face value.
I believe that God Almighty abhors homosexuality and I tend to try to agree with him at all times. It is a sin against God, not a crime to be punished by government.
(Hey, you really ought to try moving to the Mid East. They have a type of theocracy here that I think you'd really like.)
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.