[supercat]

Texas statutes define this perversion as being contact between one person's anal/oral cavities, and another person's genitalia.

But it makes it ckear that heterosexual contact, or rather, heterosexual "deviant sexual intercourse" is perfectly fine.

Do you agree with the Texas law?

First of all, I think there would be great outrage if the state were to try to pass and enforce a ban on heterosexual oral sex, especially since many couples use it as an essential aspect of foreplay.

Secondly, I'm not sure I see any real biological distinction between corresponding types of homosexual and heterosexual sodomy. Homosexual anal sodomy is a very effective method of disease transmission, but I know of no reason heterosexual anal sodomy should be any less so.

Although a ban on anal sex would probably affect homosexual males moreso, and lesbian females far less, than heterosexual people, I think such a ban would probably be more justifiable than a ban on all forms of homosexual sodomy which ignored all forms of heterosexual sodomy. Of course, maybe there are some straight couples who really like anal sex, but to my mind restrictions should be based on the specific activity rather than the sex of the participants.

[Sam Cree]

I believe that unmarried male homosexuals are far more promiscuous than umarried hetero couples, thus the danger of spreading disease is greater among homosexual couples.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"...restrictions should be based on the specific activity rather than the sex of the participants."

Exactly.

By enacting laws that are obviously targeted at a specific segment of the population, a situation is created where the argument can be made that laws impacting this specific segment of the population need to receive high scrutiny in the Courts.

While we argue that homosexuals are not to be considered a "protected classification" under current anti-discrimination laws, we continue to support actions that actually HELP them achieve that status.